On Fri, Jun 07, 2024 at 08:27:29AM -0600, David Ahern wrote:
On 6/7/24 7:42 AM, Pavel Begunkov wrote:
I haven't seen any arguments against from the (net) maintainers so far. Nor I see any objection against callbacks from them (considering that either option adds an if).
I have said before I do not understand why the dmabuf paradigm is not sufficient for both device memory and host memory. A less than ideal control path to put hostmem in a dmabuf wrapper vs extra checks and changes in the datapath. The former should always be preferred.
I think Pavel explained this - his project is principally to replace the lifetime policy of pages in the data plane. He wants to change when a page is considered available for re-allocation because userspace may continue to use the page after the netstack thinks it is done with it. It sounds like having a different source of the pages is the less important part.
IMHO it seems to compose poorly if you can only use the io_uring lifecycle model with io_uring registered memory, and not with DMABUF memory registered through Mina's mechanism.
Jason