RE: [PATCH 23/26] ib: Convert qib_get_user_pages() toget_user_pages_unlocked()

[Marciniszyn, Mike]

Inadvertent send!

Mike

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Marciniszyn, Mike
> Sent: Friday, October 04, 2013 9:39 AM
> To: Jan Kara
> Cc: LKML; linux-mm@xxxxxxxxx; infinipath; Roland Dreier; linux-
> rdma@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: RE: [PATCH 23/26] ib: Convert qib_get_user_pages() to
> get_user_pages_unlocked()
> 
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Jan Kara [mailto:jack@xxxxxxx]
> > Sent: Wednesday, October 02, 2013 11:39 AM
> > To: Marciniszyn, Mike
> > Cc: Jan Kara; LKML; linux-mm@xxxxxxxxx; infinipath; Roland Dreier;
> > linux- rdma@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Subject: Re: [PATCH 23/26] ib: Convert qib_get_user_pages() to
> > get_user_pages_unlocked()
> >
> > On Wed 02-10-13 15:32:47, Marciniszyn, Mike wrote:
> > > > > The risk of GUP fast is the loss of the "force" arg on GUP fast,
> > > > > which I don't see as significant give our use case.
> > > >   Yes. I was discussing with Roland some time ago whether the
> > > > force argument is needed and he said it is. So I kept the
> > > > arguments of
> > > > get_user_pages() intact and just simplified the locking...
> > >
> > > The PSM side of the code is a more traditional use of GUP (like
> > > direct I/O), so I think it is a different use case than the locking
> > > for IB memory regions.
> >   Ah, I see. Whatever suits you best. I don't really care as long as
> > get_user_pages() locking doesn't leak into IB drivers :)
> >
> > 								Honza
> > --
> > Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx>
> > SUSE Labs, CR
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/