Re: [PATCH v2] mm: Introduce new function vm_insert_kmem_page

From: Souptick Joarder <jrdr.linux@gmail.com>
To: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
Cc: Miguel Ojeda <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@gmail.com>,
	Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@armlinux.org.uk>,
	robin@protonic.nl, stefanr@s5r6.in-berlin.de, hjc@rock-chips.com,
	Heiko Stuebner <heiko@sntech.de>,
	airlied@linux.ie, robin.murphy@arm.com, iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@samsung.com>,
	Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
	treding@nvidia.com, Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>,
	Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>,
	"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
	aryabinin@virtuozzo.com, Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com>,
	Kate Stewart <kstewart@linuxfoundation.org>,
	tchibo@google.com, riel@redhat.com,
	Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	"Huang, Ying" <ying.huang@intel.com>,
	ak@linux.intel.com, rppt@linux.vnet.ibm.com,
	linux@dominikbrodowski.net, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
	cpandya@codeaurora.org, hannes@cmpxchg.org,
	Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>,
	mcgrof@kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux1394-devel@lists.sourceforge.net,
	dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org,
	linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org, Linux-MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] mm: Introduce new function vm_insert_kmem_page
Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2018 18:03:42 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAFqt6zZp=UsSGH148=tPWLnSxC51EGdR0Vv4f5tP58MO-6OS_w@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20181023122435.GB20085@bombadil.infradead.org>

On Tue, Oct 23, 2018 at 5:54 PM Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Oct 23, 2018 at 05:44:32PM +0530, Souptick Joarder wrote:
> > On Sat, Oct 6, 2018 at 4:19 PM Miguel Ojeda
> > <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Sat, Oct 6, 2018 at 7:11 AM Souptick Joarder <jrdr.linux@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Oct 5, 2018 at 11:39 PM Miguel Ojeda
> > > > <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > They are not supposed to be "steps". You did it with 70+ commits (!!)
> > > > > over the course of several months. Why a tree wasn't created, stuff
> > > > > developed there, and when done, submitted it for review?
> > > >
> > > > Because we already have a plan for entire vm_fault_t migration and
> > > > the * instruction * was to send one patch per driver.
> > >
> > > The instruction?
> >
> > Sorry for the delayed response.
> > Instruction from Matthew  Wilcox who is supervising the entire vm_fault_t
> > migration work :-)
>
> Hang on.  That was for the initial vm_fault_t conversion in which each
> step was clearly an improvement.  What you're looking at now is far
> from that.

Ok. But my understanding was, the approach of vm_insert_range comes
into discussion as part of converting vm_insert_page into vmf_insert_page
which is still part of original vm_fault_t conversion discussion.  No ?