From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [112.213.38.117]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D3F01C6FD1F for ; Thu, 16 Mar 2023 07:08:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: from boromir.ozlabs.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4Pcddq0v0sz3cjC for ; Thu, 16 Mar 2023 18:08:31 +1100 (AEDT) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=ellerman.id.au header.i=@ellerman.id.au header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=201909 header.b=BSYZpQwa; dkim-atps=neutral Received: from gandalf.ozlabs.org (gandalf.ozlabs.org [150.107.74.76]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4Pcdcq0BgRz3c6v for ; Thu, 16 Mar 2023 18:07:39 +1100 (AEDT) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=ellerman.id.au header.i=@ellerman.id.au header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=201909 header.b=BSYZpQwa; dkim-atps=neutral Received: from authenticated.ozlabs.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mail.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4Pcdcj43gLz4x8y; Thu, 16 Mar 2023 18:07:33 +1100 (AEDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ellerman.id.au; s=201909; t=1678950457; bh=Uoa/qK0tdF63rSzU8djzTz2HMi5Ua/1t+ckmoNcslIw=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=BSYZpQwasbtNcuTSoDT6bijTCDl/Cvkd6x8Dqlk1pdpNNQdO/1PUOyGunqOTUT5Qc ygnhlTaj0iW/PdkSEXieW1paBdk42bWFmbyxKAvIZyTV14cIlLdJuA14ixp8Hw2+Gp EBI6k1e4XLgR/uGhvP1M1Kzy20URNHQzzTAMWRmFMXZOR1DCDmfcuMTsDXoDodpCpS Ps7I+glJbtuhKuKkGArjbYELq5M0RTCCMIB+nfLYWp3ZMKkNirQUYbIK2H/rZzK3Lz QdbNQ0prhjt3knA8sTFJJ0N4OBkqKqj6CEEd8vLXBkynAotbyO1nSlLpyLsqbRQU8J 6f5dWSD2Gzbbw== From: Michael Ellerman To: Ira Weiny , Dave Hansen , Ira Weiny , Dave Hansen , Thomas Gleixner , Nicholas Piggin , Christophe Leroy , Catalin Marinas , Will Deacon , Ingo Molnar , Borislav Petkov , x86@kernel.org, "H. Peter Anvin" Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] COVER: Remove memcpy_page_flushcache() In-Reply-To: <64126d113d163_2595222942@iweiny-mobl.notmuch> References: <20221230-kmap-x86-v1-0-15f1ecccab50@intel.com> <3523ddf9-03f5-3179-9f39-cec09f79aa97@intel.com> <64126d113d163_2595222942@iweiny-mobl.notmuch> Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2023 18:07:31 +1100 Message-ID: <87lejxmax8.fsf@mpe.ellerman.id.au> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-BeenThere: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Dan Williams , linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, Al Viro , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Errors-To: linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Sender: "Linuxppc-dev" Ira Weiny writes: > Dave Hansen wrote: >> On 3/15/23 16:20, Ira Weiny wrote: >> > Commit 21b56c847753 ("iov_iter: get rid of separate bvec and xarray >> > callbacks") removed the calls to memcpy_page_flushcache(). >> > >> > kmap_atomic() is deprecated and used in the x86 version of >> > memcpy_page_flushcache(). >> > >> > Remove the unnecessary memcpy_page_flushcache() call from all arch's. >> >> Hi Ira, >> >> Since the common code user is already gone these three patches seem >> quite independent. It seems like the right thing to do is have >> individual arch maintainers cherry pick their arch patch and carry it >> independently. > > Yes. > >> >> Is there a compelling reason to have someone pick up and carry these all >> together that I'm missing? > > No reason. Would you like me to submit them individually? I'll just grab the powerpc one from the thread, no need to resend. > Sorry, submitting them separately crossed my mind when I wrote them but I > kind of forgot as they were all on the same branch and I was waiting for > after the merge window to submit them. It's also much easier to run git-send-email HEAD^^^, rather than running it three separate times, let alone if it's a 20 patch series. I wonder if we could come up with some convention to indicate that a series is made up of independent patches, and maintainers are free to pick them individually - but still sent as a single series. cheers