On 8/22/19 5:24 PM, Ira Weiny wrote: > On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 09:07:24PM -0700, John Hubbard wrote: >> Hi Ira, >> >> This is for your tree. I'm dropping the RFC because this aspect is >> starting to firm up pretty well. >> >> I've moved FOLL_PIN inside the vaddr_pin_*() routines, and moved >> FOLL_LONGTERM outside, based on our recent discussions. This is >> documented pretty well within the patches. >> >> Note that there are a lot of references in comments and commit >> logs, to vaddr_pin_pages(). We'll want to catch all of those if >> we rename that. I am pushing pretty hard to rename it to >> vaddr_pin_user_pages(). >> >> v1 of this may be found here: >> https://lore.kernel.org/r/20190812015044.26176-1-jhubbard@xxxxxxxxxx > > I am really sorry about this... > > I think it is fine to pull these in... There are some nits which are wrong but > I think with the XDP complication and Daves' objection I think the vaddr_pin > information is going to need reworking. So the documentation there is probably > wrong. But until we know what it is going to be we should just take this. > Sure, I was thinking the same thing: FOLL_PIN is clearing up, but vaddr_pin_pages() is still under heavy discussion. > Do you have a branch with this on it? > Yes, it's on: git@xxxxxxxxxx:johnhubbard/linux.git , branch: vaddr_FOLL_PIN_next > The patches don't seem to apply. Looks like they got corrupted somewhere... > Lately I'm trying out .nvidia.com outgoing servers for git-send-email, so I'm still nervous about potential email-based patch problems. I suspect, though, that it's really just a "must be on exactly the right commit in order to apply" situation. Please let me know, so I can make any corrections necessary on this end. thanks, -- John Hubbard NVIDIA
