On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 09:56:50AM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 21, 2019 at 11:41:31AM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > > static bool gup_fast_permitted(unsigned long start, unsigned long end)
> > > {
> > > - return true;
> > > + return IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_HAVE_FAST_GUP) ? true :
On Fri, Jun 21, 2019 at 11:41:31AM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > static bool gup_fast_permitted(unsigned long start, unsigned long end)
> > {
> > - return true;
> > + return IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_HAVE_FAST_GUP) ? true : false;
>
> The ?: is needed with IS_ENABLED?
It shouldn't, I'll fix it
On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 04:40:57PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> @@ -2168,7 +2221,7 @@ static void gup_pgd_range(unsigned long addr, unsigned
> long end,
> */
> static bool gup_fast_permitted(unsigned long start, unsigned long end)
> {
> - return true;
> + return IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_
Always build mm/gup.c, and move the nommu versions and replace the
separate stubs for various functions by the default ones, with the _fast
version always falling back to the slow path because gup_fast_permitted
always returns false now if HAVE_FAST_GUP is not set, and we use the
nommu version of _
