On Wed, Sep 30, 2020 at 12:53:21PM +0300, Leon Romanovsky wrote: > On Tue, Sep 29, 2020 at 04:59:29PM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > > On Sun, Sep 27, 2020 at 09:46:47AM +0300, Leon Romanovsky wrote: > > > @@ -296,11 +223,17 @@ static struct ib_umem *__ib_umem_get(struct ib_device *device, > > > goto umem_release; > > > > > > cur_base += ret * PAGE_SIZE; > > > - npages -= ret; > > > - > > > - sg = ib_umem_add_sg_table(sg, page_list, ret, > > > - dma_get_max_seg_size(device->dma_device), > > > - &umem->sg_nents); > > > + npages -= ret; > > > + sg = __sg_alloc_table_from_pages( > > > + &umem->sg_head, page_list, ret, 0, ret << PAGE_SHIFT, > > > + dma_get_max_seg_size(device->dma_device), sg, npages, > > > + GFP_KERNEL); > > > + umem->sg_nents = umem->sg_head.nents; > > > + if (IS_ERR(sg)) { > > > + unpin_user_pages_dirty_lock(page_list, ret, 0); > > > + ret = PTR_ERR(sg); > > > + goto umem_release; > > > + } > > > } > > > > > > sg_mark_end(sg); > > > > Does it still need the sg_mark_end? > > It is preserved here for correctness, the release logic doesn't rely on > this marker, but it is better to leave it. I mean, my read of __sg_alloc_table_from_pages() is that it already placed it, the final __alloc_table() does it? Jason _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx