On 8/2/19 6:27 PM, Calum Mackay wrote:
> On 02/08/2019 3:20 am, john.hubbard@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
...
> Since it's static, and only called twice, might it be better to change its two callers [nfs_direct_{read,write}_schedule_iovec()] to call put_user_pages() directly, and remove nfs_direct_release_pages() entirely?
>
> thanks,
> calum.
>
>
>> void nfs_init_cinfo_from_dreq(struct nfs_commit_info *cinfo,
>>
Hi Calum,
Absolutely! Is it OK to add your reviewed-by, with the following incremental
patch made to this one?
diff --git a/fs/nfs/direct.c b/fs/nfs/direct.c
index b00b89dda3c5..c0c1b9f2c069 100644
--- a/fs/nfs/direct.c
+++ b/fs/nfs/direct.c
@@ -276,11 +276,6 @@ ssize_t nfs_direct_IO(struct kiocb *iocb, struct iov_iter *iter)
return nfs_file_direct_write(iocb, iter);
}
-static void nfs_direct_release_pages(struct page **pages, unsigned int npages)
-{
- put_user_pages(pages, npages);
-}
-
void nfs_init_cinfo_from_dreq(struct nfs_commit_info *cinfo,
struct nfs_direct_req *dreq)
{
@@ -510,7 +505,7 @@ static ssize_t nfs_direct_read_schedule_iovec(struct nfs_direct_req *dreq,
pos += req_len;
dreq->bytes_left -= req_len;
}
- nfs_direct_release_pages(pagevec, npages);
+ put_user_pages(pagevec, npages);
kvfree(pagevec);
if (result < 0)
break;
@@ -933,7 +928,7 @@ static ssize_t nfs_direct_write_schedule_iovec(struct nfs_direct_req *dreq,
pos += req_len;
dreq->bytes_left -= req_len;
}
- nfs_direct_release_pages(pagevec, npages);
+ put_user_pages(pagevec, npages);
kvfree(pagevec);
if (result < 0)
break;
thanks,
--
John Hubbard
NVIDIA
_______________________________________________
amd-gfx mailing list
amd-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/amd-gfx
