From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.3 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0077EC3A59F for ; Thu, 29 Aug 2019 07:00:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9FD7B22CF5 for ; Thu, 29 Aug 2019 07:00:06 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 9FD7B22CF5 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=lst.de Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 3AFF56B000D; Thu, 29 Aug 2019 03:00:06 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 360E96B000E; Thu, 29 Aug 2019 03:00:06 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 29E3C6B0010; Thu, 29 Aug 2019 03:00:06 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from forelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0185.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.185]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0B1826B000D for ; Thu, 29 Aug 2019 03:00:06 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin17.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by forelay04.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 98310AF9F for ; Thu, 29 Aug 2019 07:00:05 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 75874565970.17.queen44_bfa7e910a0e X-HE-Tag: queen44_bfa7e910a0e X-Filterd-Recvd-Size: 2073 Received: from verein.lst.de (verein.lst.de [213.95.11.211]) by imf02.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP for ; Thu, 29 Aug 2019 07:00:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: by verein.lst.de (Postfix, from userid 2407) id D92A468C4E; Thu, 29 Aug 2019 08:59:59 +0200 (CEST) Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2019 08:59:59 +0200 From: Christoph Hellwig To: Jason Gunthorpe Cc: Christoph Hellwig , Linus Torvalds , Andrew Morton , Thomas =?iso-8859-1?Q?Hellstr=F6m?= , Jerome Glisse , Steven Price , "linux-mm@kvack.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Thomas Hellstrom Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] pagewalk: separate function pointers from iterator data Message-ID: <20190829065959.GA11628@lst.de> References: <20190828141955.22210-1-hch@lst.de> <20190828141955.22210-3-hch@lst.de> <20190828150514.GN914@mellanox.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20190828150514.GN914@mellanox.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01) X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 03:05:19PM +0000, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > > @@ -1217,7 +1222,8 @@ static ssize_t clear_refs_write(struct file *file, const char __user *buf, > > 0, NULL, mm, 0, -1UL); > > mmu_notifier_invalidate_range_start(&range); > > } > > - walk_page_range(0, mm->highest_vm_end, &clear_refs_walk); > > + walk_page_range(mm, 0, mm->highest_vm_end, &clear_refs_walk_ops, > > + &cp); > > Is the difference between TASK_SIZE and 'highest_vm_end' deliberate, > or should we add a 'walk_all_pages'() mini helper for this? I see most > of the users are using one or the other variant. I have no idea to be honest. A walk_all_pages-like helper doesn't seem like a bad idea, but the priority seems lower than cleaning up all the callers using walk_page_range on a vma..