I think at least to start it probably makes sense to keep regular vm_insert_page() around - smaller stack used, less branches, if you know you just need one page - not sure if gcc would err towards smaller binary or not when compiling. Regarding the page_count() check - as far as I can tell that's just checking to make sure that at least *someone* has a reference to the page before inserting it; in the zerocopy case we most definitely do but I guess a bad caller could call it with a bad page argument and this would guard against that. Actually, I appear to have fat fingered it - I intended for this check to be in there but seem to have forgotten (per the comment "/* Defer page refcount checking till we're about to map that page. */" but with no actual check). So that check should go inside insert_page_in_batch_locked(), right before the validate_page_before_insert() check. I'll send an updated fixup diff shortly. -Arjun On Wed, Feb 12, 2020 at 6:41 PM Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Mon, 27 Jan 2020 18:59:57 -0800 Arjun Roy <arjunroy.kdev@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > Add the ability to insert multiple pages at once to a user VM with > > lower PTE spinlock operations. > > > > The intention of this patch-set is to reduce atomic ops for > > tcp zerocopy receives, which normally hits the same spinlock multiple > > times consecutively. > > Seems sensible, thanks. Some other vm_insert_page() callers might want > to know about this, but I can't immediately spot any which appear to be > high bandwidth. > > Is there much point in keeping the vm_insert_page() implementation > around? Replace it with > > static inline int > vm_insert_page(struct vm_area_struct *vma, unsigned long addr, > struct page *page) > { > return vm_insert_pages(vma, addr, &page, 1); > } > > ? > > Also, vm_insert_page() does > > if (!page_count(page)) > return -EINVAL; > > and this was not carried over into vm_insert_pages(). How come? > > I don't know what that test does - it was added by Linus in the > original commit a145dd411eb28c83. It's only been 15 years so I'm sure > he remembers ;)