Re: [PATCH v5 0/9] mmu notifier provide context informations

From: Dan Williams
Date: Tue Feb 19 2019 - 15:40:52 EST


On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 12:30 PM Jerome Glisse <jglisse@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 12:15:55PM -0800, Dan Williams wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 12:04 PM <jglisse@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > > From: JÃrÃme Glisse <jglisse@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > >
> > > Since last version [4] i added the extra bits needed for the change_pte
> > > optimization (which is a KSM thing). Here i am not posting users of
> > > this, they will be posted to the appropriate sub-systems (KVM, GPU,
> > > RDMA, ...) once this serie get upstream. If you want to look at users
> > > of this see [5] [6]. If this gets in 5.1 then i will be submitting
> > > those users for 5.2 (including KVM if KVM folks feel comfortable with
> > > it).
> >
> > The users look small and straightforward. Why not await acks and
> > reviewed-by's for the users like a typical upstream submission and
> > merge them together? Is all of the functionality of this
> > infrastructure consumed by the proposed users? Last time I checked it
> > was only a subset.
>
> Yes pretty much all is use, the unuse case is SOFT_DIRTY and CLEAR
> vs UNMAP. Both of which i intend to use. The RDMA folks already ack
> the patches IIRC, so did radeon and amdgpu. I believe the i915 folks
> were ok with it too. I do not want to merge things through Andrew
> for all of this we discussed that in the past, merge mm bits through
> Andrew in one release and bits that use things in the next release.

Ok, I was trying to find the links to the acks on the mailing list,
those references would address my concerns. I see no reason to rush
SOFT_DIRTY and CLEAR ahead of the upstream user.