Re: [PATCH 5/5] vfio-pci: Best-effort huge pfnmaps with !MAP_FIXED mappings

[Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com>]

On Wed, Jun 18, 2025 at 03:15:50PM -0400, Peter Xu wrote:
> > > So I changed my mind, slightly.  I can still have the "order" parameter to
> > > make the API cleaner (even if it'll be a pure overhead.. because all
> > > existing caller will pass in PUD_SIZE as of now), 
> > 
> > That doesn't seem right, the callers should report the real value not
> > artifically cap it.. Like ARM does have page sizes greater than PUD
> > that might be interesting to enable someday for PFN users.
> 
> It needs to pass in PUD_SIZE to match what vfio-pci currently supports in
> its huge_fault().

Hm, OK that does make sense. I would add a small comment though as it
is not so intuitive and may not apply to something using ioremap..

> So this will introduce a new file operation that will only be used so far
> in VFIO, playing similar role until we start to convert many
> get_unmapped_area() to this one.

Yes, if someone wants to do a project here you can markup
memfds/shmem/hugetlbfs/etc/etc to define their internal folio orders
and hopefully ultimately remove some of that alignment logic from the
arch code.

Jason