> - 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 [email protected]. For more info on Linux MM,
> see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
> Don't email: <a href=mailto:"[email protected]";> [email protected] </a>
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
