[add cc:tech-kern] hi,
>> what's the point of implementing it in the single VOP? >> ie. how is it better than having VOP_GETPAGES_XIP and pgo_get_xip? > > Why not adding VOP_GETPAGES_XIP - because XIP is almost transparent to > filesystems. The difference between XIP or not is only where to get pages, > which is beyond filesystem's task. it doesn't sound convincing to me, given that you have a separate copy of genfs_getpages for xip. YAMAMOTO Takashi > > Why not adding pgo_get_xip - because I didn't think it's worth adding it. > XIP is transparent to other UVM pagers. (And only used by vnode anyway.) > > Why not done in pgo_get (uvn_get) - it's possible. My 1st implementation > did the task in uvn_get(). I've changed it because what it does is close to > (generic) genfs_getpages(). > >> is it allowed to return both of "device pages" and normal pages mixed >> for a request? > > That should work. Once vm_page *[] are filled and passed back to UVM, they're > deal with one-by-one. > > Masao > > -- > Masao Uebayashi / Tombi Inc. / Tel: +81-90-9141-4635
