On Mon, Nov 04, 2019 at 03:31:53PM -0500, Jerome Glisse wrote: > > Note for Jason: the (a) or (b) items are talking about the vfio case, which is > > one of the two call sites that now use pin_longterm_pages_remote(), and the > > other one is infiniband: > > > > drivers/infiniband/core/umem_odp.c:646: npages = pin_longterm_pages_remote(owning_process, owning_mm, > > drivers/vfio/vfio_iommu_type1.c:353: ret = pin_longterm_pages_remote(NULL, mm, vaddr, 1, > > vfio should be reverted until it can be properly implemented. > The issue is that when you fix the implementation you might > break vfio existing user and thus regress the kernel from user > point of view. So i rather have the change to vfio reverted, > i believe it was not well understood when it got upstream, > between in my 5.4 tree it is still gup_remote not longterm. It is clearly a bug, vfio must use LONGTERM, and does right above this remote call: if (mm == current->mm) { ret = get_user_pages(vaddr, 1, flags | FOLL_LONGTERM, page, vmas); } else { ret = get_user_pages_remote(NULL, mm, vaddr, 1, flags, page, vmas, NULL); I'm not even sure that it really makes any sense to build a 'if' like that, surely just always call remote?? Jason