Re: Removing page->index

[David Hildenbrand]

On 10.12.24 13:04, Claudio Imbrenda wrote:
> On Tue, 10 Dec 2024 12:05:25 +0100
> David Hildenbrand <david@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > On 09.12.24 18:36, Claudio Imbrenda wrote:
> > > On Wed, 4 Dec 2024 16:58:52 +0100
> > > David Hildenbrand <david@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> > > > I know that Claudio is working on some changes, but not sure how that
> > > > would affect gmap's usage of page->index.
> > >
> > > After I'm done, we won't use page->index anymore.
> > >
> > > The changes I'm working on are massive, it's very impractical to push
> > > everything at once, so I'm refactoring and splitting smaller and more
> > > manageable (and reviewable) series.
> > >
> > > This means that it will take some time before I'm done (I'm *hoping*
> > > to be done for 6.15)
> >
> > Thanks for the information. So for the time being, we could likely
> > switch to page->private.
> >
> > One question may be whether these (not-user-space) page tables should at
> > some point deserve a dedicated memdesc. But likely the question is what
>
> maybe? but given that everything is changing all the time, I'm avoiding
> any magic logic in struct page / struct folio.

I think Willy wants to get rid of page->index in the next release, so 
any way to avoid the page->index usage in s390x is appreciated. 
page->private might be the low hanging fruit. If your approach is 
feasible in that time frame, it would also be great.

--
Cheers,

David / dhildenb