On lunedì 16 maggio 2022 16:55:54 CEST Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Mon, May 16, 2022 at 12:19:25PM +0200, Fabio M. De Francesco wrote:
> > The use of kmap() is being deprecated in favor of kmap_local_page().
With
> > kmap_local_page(), the mapping is per thread, CPU local and not
globally
> > visible.
> >
> > The usage of kmap_local_page() in fs/ufs is pre-thread, therefore
replace
> > kmap() / kunmap() calls with kmap_local_page() / kunmap_local().
> >
> > kunmap_local() requires the mapping address, so return that address
from
> > ufs_get_page() to be used in ufs_put_page().
> >
> > These changes are essentially ported from fs/ext2 and are largely based
on
> > commit 782b76d7abdf ("fs/ext2: Replace kmap() with kmap_local_page()").
> >
> > Suggested-by: Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@xxxxxxxxx>
> > Reviewed-by: Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@xxxxxxxxx>
> > Signed-off-by: Fabio M. De Francesco <fmdefrancesco@xxxxxxxxx>
>
> Have you done more than compile-tested this? I'd like to know that it's
> been tested on a machine with HIGHMEM enabled (in a VM, presumably).
> UFS doesn't get a lot of testing, and it'd be annoying to put out a
> patch that breaks the kmap_local() rules.
>
As said in another message of this thread, these changes have only been
compile-tested. I can't see anything which may break the rules about using
local mappings properly.
I'm working on converting all kmap() call sites I can do across the whole
kernel to kmap_local_page(). Practically all of those conversions have
already been reviewed / acked, and many of them have already been taken by
their respective maintainers. Others are still too recent.
Most of those patches have been properly tested on a QEMU/KVM x86_32 VM,
4GB to 6GB RAM, booting kernels with HIGHMEM64GB enabled.
Instead, despite this submission is very old, I haven't yet been able to
figure out how to test these changes. I really don't know how I can create
and test a UFS filesystem.
Can you please help somewhat with hints about how to test this patch or
with testing it yourself? I'm thinking of this option because I suppose
that you may have access to a Solaris system (if I recall correctly, UFS is
the default filesystem of that OS. Isn't it?).
I'm sorry to bother you with this issue, however I'd appreciate any help
you may provide. I'd hate to see all patches applied but one :-)
Thanks,
Fabio
