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:   Thu, 20 Apr 2023 14:57:57 +0100
From:   Lorenzo Stoakes <lstoakes@gmail.com>
To:     Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com>
Cc:     Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>, Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>,
        linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>,
        Pavel Begunkov <asml.silence@gmail.com>,
        io-uring@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 4/6] io_uring: rsrc: avoid use of vmas parameter in
 pin_user_pages()
Message-ID: <5ead8d8c-6f47-4db1-b1da-ffaaee4be255@lucifer.local>
References: <f82b9025-a586-44c7-9941-8140c04a4ccc@lucifer.local>
 <69f48cc6-8fc6-0c49-5a79-6c7d248e4ad5@kernel.dk>
 <bec03e0f-a0f9-43c3-870b-be406ca848b9@lucifer.local>
 <8af483d2-0d3d-5ece-fb1d-a3654411752b@kernel.dk>
 <d601ca0c-d9b8-4e5d-a047-98f2d1c65eb9@lucifer.local>
 <ZEAxhHx/4Ql6AMt2@casper.infradead.org>
 <ZEAx90C2lDMJIux1@nvidia.com>
 <ZEA0dbV+qIBSD0mG@casper.infradead.org>
 <8bf0df41-27ef-4305-b424-e43045a6d68d@lucifer.local>
 <ZEB3y0V2GSDcUMc2@nvidia.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <ZEB3y0V2GSDcUMc2@nvidia.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, Apr 19, 2023 at 08:22:51PM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 19, 2023 at 07:45:06PM +0100, Lorenzo Stoakes wrote:
>
> > For example, imagine if a user (yes it'd be weird) mlock'd some pages in a
> > buffer and not others, then we'd break their use case. Also (perhaps?) more
> > feasibly, a user might mix hugetlb and anon pages. So I think that'd be too
> > restrictive here.
>
> Yeah, I agree we should not add a broad single-vma restriction to
> GUP. It turns any split of a VMA into a potentially uABI breaking
> change and we just don't need that headache in the mm..
>
> > I do like the idea of a FOLL_SINGLE_VMA for other use cases though, the
> > majority of which want one and one page only. Perhaps worth taking the
> > helper added in this series (get_user_page_vma_remote() from [1]) and
> > replacing it with an a full GUP function which has an interface explicitly
> > for this common single page/vma case.
>
> Like I showed in another thread a function signature that can only do
> one page and also returns the VMA would force it to be used properly
> and we don't need a FOLL flag.
>

Indeed the latest spin of the series uses this. The point is by doing so we
can use per-VMA locks for a common case, I was thinking perhaps as a
separate function call (or perhaps just reusing the wrapper).

This would be entirely separate to all the other work.

> Jason