Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [patch 3/3] mm: fault handler to replace nopage and populate | From | Benjamin Herrenschmidt <> | Date | Mon, 09 Oct 2006 09:46:13 +1000 |
| |
> - So is the plan here to migrate all code over to using > vm_operations.fault() and to finally remove vm_operations.nopage and > .nopfn? If so, that'd be nice.
Agreed. That would also allow to pass down knowledge of wether we can be interruptible or not (coming from userland or not). Useful in a few case when dealing with strange hw mappings.
Now, fault() still returns a struct page and thus doesn't quite fix the problem I'm exposing in my "User switchable HW mappings & cie" mail I posted today in which case we need to either duplicate the truncate logic in no_pfn() or get rid of no_pfn() and set the PTE from the fault handler . I tend to prefer the later provided that it's strictly limited for mappings that do not have a struct page though.
> - As you know, there is a case for constructing that `struct fault_data' > all the way up in do_no_page(): so we can pass data back, asking > do_no_page() to rerun the fault if we dropped mmap_sem. > > - No useful opinion on the substance of this patch, sorry. It's Saturday ;) > > -- > To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in > the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, > see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . > Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |