Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Tue, 28 Jun 2022 21:06:10 +0100
From:   Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
To:     Pavel Begunkov <asml.silence@gmail.com>
Cc:     io-uring@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        "David S . Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>,
        Jonathan Lemon <jonathan.lemon@gmail.com>,
        Willem de Bruijn <willemb@google.com>,
        Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>, kernel-team@fb.com
Subject: Re: [RFC net-next v3 05/29] net: bvec specific path in
 zerocopy_sg_from_iter
Message-ID: <YrtfMr+waxp37ru9@ZenIV>
References: <cover.1653992701.git.asml.silence@gmail.com>
 <5143111391e771dc97237e2a5e6a74223ef8f15f.1653992701.git.asml.silence@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <5143111391e771dc97237e2a5e6a74223ef8f15f.1653992701.git.asml.silence@gmail.com>
Sender: Al Viro <viro@ftp.linux.org.uk>
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Jun 28, 2022 at 07:56:27PM +0100, Pavel Begunkov wrote:
> Add an bvec specialised and optimised path in zerocopy_sg_from_iter.
> It'll be used later for {get,put}_page() optimisations.

If you need a variant that would not grab page references for ITER_BVEC
(and presumably other non-userland ones), the natural thing to do would
be to provide just such a primitive, wouldn't it?

The fun question here is by which paths ITER_BVEC can be passed to that
function and which all of them are currently guaranteed to hold the
underlying pages pinned...

And AFAICS you quietly assume that only ITER_BVEC ones will ever have that
"managed" flag of your set.  Or am I misreading the next patch in the
series?