[lkml]   [2011]   [Jan]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: still nfs problems [Was: Linux 2.6.37-rc8]
On Wed, 2011-01-05 at 13:08 -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote: 
> On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 1:04 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux
> <> wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 05, 2011 at 12:48:32PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> >> (You can also force the problem with vmalloc() an then following the
> >> kernel page tables, but I hope nobody does that any more. I suspect
> >> I'm wrong, though, there's probably code that mixes vmalloc and
> >> physical page accesses in various drivers)
> >
> > Should vmalloc_to_page() (84 users)/vmalloc_to_pfn() (17 users) be
> > deprecated then? ;)
> I do think that the "modern" way of doing it is
> "vmap()"/"vm_map_ram()" and friends, and it should be preferred over
> using vmalloc() and then looking up the pages.
> But in the end, the two approaches really are equivalent, so it's not
> like it really matters. So I don't think we need to deprecate things
> officially, but obviously we should make people more aware of the
> whole virtual alias thing that crops up whenever you use any of these
> approaches.

So what should be the preferred way to ensure data gets flushed when
you've written directly to a page, and then want to read through the
vm_map_ram() virtual range? Should we be adding new semantics to

Trond Myklebust
Linux NFS client maintainer


 \ /
  Last update: 2011-01-05 22:19    [W:0.087 / U:1.232 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site