On Wed, Apr 03, 2019 at 08:15:14PM +0300, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> > @@ -203,28 +263,29 @@ struct ib_umem *ib_umem_get(struct ib_udata *udata, unsigned long addr,
> > goto umem_release;
> > }
> >
> > - umem->npages += ret;
> > cur_base += ret * PAGE_SIZE;
> > npages -= ret;
> >
> > + sg = ib_umem_add_sg_table(sg, page_list, ret,
> > + dma_get_max_seg_size(context->device->dma_device),
> > + &umem->sg_nents);
> > +
> > /* Continue to hold the mmap_sem as vma_list access
> > * needs to be protected.
> > */
> > - for_each_sg(sg_list_start, sg, ret, i) {
> > + for (i = 0; i < ret && umem->hugetlb; i++) {
> > if (vma_list && !is_vm_hugetlb_page(vma_list[i]))
> > umem->hugetlb = 0;
> > -
> > - sg_set_page(sg, page_list[i], PAGE_SIZE, 0);
> > }
>
> I was under wrong impression that we removed hugetlb flag. Is it still needed?
> And more general question, how was 2G limit chosen?
The next patches do that - it can't be done until the two drivers
using it convert to this new interface.
This specific patch is just the only patch in the process that impacts
every driver, and is what all the work thus far has been to make safe.
Once this is applied it will be easy to apply the next ones as they
only impact two drivers and other drivers can debug and use the new
features as they need.
Jason
