Re: [PATCH V1 1/9] mm/gup: repin_folio_unhugely

[David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>]

On 26.09.24 14:57, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> On 26.09.24 13:40, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
>> On Thu, Sep 26, 2024 at 01:32:09PM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
>>> On 20.09.24 15:28, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
>>>> On Thu, Sep 19, 2024 at 10:11:38AM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>>> And repin is really misleading. We are simply adding more pins to an already pinned one ...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Jason suggests a better name in the other thread.
>>>>>
>>>>> I would prefer something that simply adds more pins to an already pinned
>>>>> folio. Much easier to get.
>>>>
>>>> Yes, but also nobody should ever want to do that operation, it should
>>>> always be part of some kind of "splitting" sort of behavior..
>>>
>>> I remember patches from Dave Howells that needed that for O_DIRECT handling.
>>> Never say never ;)
>>
>> Wouldn't O_DIRECT be the same splitting thing?
> 
> No, I recall the implementation had to duplicate pins, not split.
> 
>>
>>> Adding is much more intuitive than splitting ... just like we add references
>>> when splitting a THP, using folio_ref_add().
>>
>> Well, sure, it just seems harder to document so people can use it
>> properly.
> 
> As soon as we have large GUP 

s/GUP/PUD/

-- 
Cheers,

David / dhildenb