search for: folio_owner_op

Displaying 7 results from an estimated 7 matches for "folio_owner_op".

Did you mean: folio_owner_ops
2024 Nov 12
1
[RFC PATCH v1 00/10] mm: Introduce and use folio_owner_ops
On Mon, Nov 11, 2024 at 08:26:54AM +0000, Fuad Tabba wrote: > Thanks for your comments Jason, and for clarifying my cover letter > David. I think David has covered everything, and I'll make sure to > clarify this in the cover letter when I respin. I don't want you to respin. I think this is a bad idea.
2024 Nov 12
1
[RFC PATCH v1 00/10] mm: Introduce and use folio_owner_ops
On 12.11.24 06:26, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > On Mon, Nov 11, 2024 at 08:26:54AM +0000, Fuad Tabba wrote: >> Thanks for your comments Jason, and for clarifying my cover letter >> David. I think David has covered everything, and I'll make sure to >> clarify this in the cover letter when I respin. > > I don't want you to respin. I think this is a bad idea. I'm
2024 Nov 11
1
[RFC PATCH v1 00/10] mm: Introduce and use folio_owner_ops
Hi Jason and David, On Fri, 8 Nov 2024 at 19:33, David Hildenbrand <david at redhat.com> wrote: > > On 08.11.24 18:05, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > > On Fri, Nov 08, 2024 at 04:20:30PM +0000, Fuad Tabba wrote: > >> Some folios, such as hugetlb folios and zone device folios, > >> require special handling when the folio's reference count reaches > >> 0,
2024 Nov 12
1
[RFC PATCH v1 00/10] mm: Introduce and use folio_owner_ops
On Tue, Nov 12, 2024 at 10:10:06AM +0100, David Hildenbrand wrote: > On 12.11.24 06:26, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 11, 2024 at 08:26:54AM +0000, Fuad Tabba wrote: > > > Thanks for your comments Jason, and for clarifying my cover letter > > > David. I think David has covered everything, and I'll make sure to > > > clarify this in the cover letter
2024 Nov 12
1
[RFC PATCH v1 00/10] mm: Introduce and use folio_owner_ops
On 12.11.24 14:53, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > On Tue, Nov 12, 2024 at 10:10:06AM +0100, David Hildenbrand wrote: >> On 12.11.24 06:26, Matthew Wilcox wrote: >>> On Mon, Nov 11, 2024 at 08:26:54AM +0000, Fuad Tabba wrote: >>>> Thanks for your comments Jason, and for clarifying my cover letter >>>> David. I think David has covered everything, and I'll make
2024 Nov 08
1
[RFC PATCH v1 00/10] mm: Introduce and use folio_owner_ops
On 08.11.24 18:05, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > On Fri, Nov 08, 2024 at 04:20:30PM +0000, Fuad Tabba wrote: >> Some folios, such as hugetlb folios and zone device folios, >> require special handling when the folio's reference count reaches >> 0, before being freed. Moreover, guest_memfd folios will likely >> require special handling to notify it once a folio's
2024 Nov 13
2
[RFC PATCH v1 00/10] mm: Introduce and use folio_owner_ops
...ugetlb not use folio->private and make others > not use bitX. Might be harder and overkill, because right now we only really > need the callback when refcount==0. > > (c) Use some other indication that folio->private contains folio_ops. I really don't want to use folio_ops / folio_owner_ops. I read https://lore.kernel.org/all/CAGtprH_JP2w-4rq02h_Ugvq5KuHX7TUvegOS7xUs_iy5hriE7g at mail.gmail.com/ and I still don't understand what you're trying to do. Would it work to use aops->free_folio() to notify you when the folio is being removed from the address space?