[patch RFC 00/15] mm/highmem: Provide a preemptible variant of kmap_atomic & friends
Thomas Gleixner
tglx at linutronix.de
Sun Sep 20 17:24:49 UTC 2020
On Sun, Sep 20 2020 at 10:23, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 20, 2020 at 08:23:26AM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>> On Sat, Sep 19 2020 at 12:37, Daniel Vetter wrote:
>> > On Sat, Sep 19, 2020 at 12:35 PM Daniel Vetter <daniel at ffwll.ch> wrote:
>> >> I think it should be the case, but I want to double check: Will
>> >> copy_*_user be allowed within a kmap_temporary section? This would
>> >> allow us to ditch an absolute pile of slowpaths.
>> >
>> > (coffee just kicked in) copy_*_user is ofc allowed, but if you hit a
>> > page fault you get a short read/write. This looks like it would remove
>> > the need to handle these in a slowpath, since page faults can now be
>> > served in this new kmap_temporary sections. But this sounds too good
>> > to be true, so I'm wondering what I'm missing.
>>
>> In principle we could allow pagefaults, but not with the currently
>> proposed interface which can be called from any context. Obviously if
>> called from atomic context it can't handle user page faults.
>
> Yeah that's clear, but does the implemention need to disable pagefaults
> unconditionally?
As I wrote in the other reply it's not required and the final interface
will neither disable preemption nor pagefaults (except for the atomic
wrapper around it).
Thanks,
tglx
More information about the dri-devel
mailing list