On Tue, Jul 05, 2022 at 06:12:40PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Tue, Jul 05, 2022 at 10:51:02AM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > > > In fact I'm not even sure this should be a character device, it seems > > > to fit it way better with the PCI sysfs hierchacy, just like how we > > > map MMIO resources, which these are anyway. And once it is on sysfs > > > we do have a uniqueue inode and need none of the pseudofs stuff, and > > > don't need all the glue code in nvme either. > > > > Shouldn't there be an allocator here? It feels a bit weird that the > > entire CMB is given to a single process, it is a sharable resource, > > isn't it? > > Making the entire area given by the device to the p2p allocator available > to user space seems sensible to me. That is what the current series does, > and what a sysfs interface would do as well. That makes openning the mmap exclusive with the in-kernel allocator - so it means opening the mmap fails if something else is using a P2P page and once the mmap is open all kernel side P2P allocations will fail? Which seems inelegant, I would expect the the mmap operation to request some pages from the P2P allocator and provide them to userspace so user and kernel workflows can co-exist using the same CMB. Jason
