On 2020/10/12 13:28, Ira Weiny wrote: > On Sat, Oct 10, 2020 at 10:20:34AM +0800, Coly Li wrote: >> On 2020/10/10 03:50, ira.weiny@xxxxxxxxx wrote: >>> From: Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@xxxxxxxxx> >>> >>> These kmap() calls are localized to a single thread. To avoid the over >>> head of global PKRS updates use the new kmap_thread() call. >>> >> >> Hi Ira, >> >> There were a number of options considered. >> >> 1) Attempt to change all the thread local kmap() calls to kmap_atomic() >> 2) Introduce a flags parameter to kmap() to indicate if the mapping >> should be global or not >> 3) Change ~20-30 call sites to 'kmap_global()' to indicate that they >> require a global mapping of the pages >> 4) Change ~209 call sites to 'kmap_thread()' to indicate that the >> mapping is to be used within that thread of execution only >> >> >> I copied the above information from patch 00/58 to this message. The >> idea behind kmap_thread() is fine to me, but as you said the new api is >> very easy to be missed in new code (even for me). I would like to be >> supportive to option 2) introduce a flag to kmap(), then we won't forget >> the new thread-localized kmap method, and people won't ask why a >> _thread() function is called but no kthread created. > > Thanks for the feedback. > > I'm going to hold off making any changes until others weigh in. FWIW, I kind > of like option 2 as well. But there is already kmap_atomic() so it seemed like > kmap_XXXX() was more in line with the current API. I understand it now, the idea is fine to me. Acked-by: Coly Li <colyli@xxxxxxx> Thanks. Coly Li _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
