[Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH RFC PKS/PMEM 22/58] fs/f2fs: Utilize new kmap_thread()

Dave Hansen dave.hansen at intel.com
Mon Oct 12 16:28:29 UTC 2020


On 10/12/20 9:19 AM, Eric Biggers wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 11, 2020 at 11:56:35PM -0700, Ira Weiny wrote:
>>> And I still don't really understand.  After this patchset, there is still code
>>> nearly identical to the above (doing a temporary mapping just for a memcpy) that
>>> would still be using kmap_atomic().
>> I don't understand.  You mean there would be other call sites calling:
>>
>> kmap_atomic()
>> memcpy()
>> kunmap_atomic()
> Yes, there are tons of places that do this.  Try 'git grep -A6 kmap_atomic'
> and look for memcpy().
> 
> Hence why I'm asking what will be the "recommended" way to do this...
> kunmap_thread() or kmap_atomic()?

kmap_atomic() is always preferred over kmap()/kmap_thread().
kmap_atomic() is _much_ more lightweight since its TLB invalidation is
always CPU-local and never broadcast.

So, basically, unless you *must* sleep while the mapping is in place,
kmap_atomic() is preferred.



More information about the Intel-wired-lan mailing list