From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com>
Cc: Nadav Amit <nadav.amit@gmail.com>, Linux-MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>,
stable@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] userfaultfd: mark uffd_wp regardless of VM_WRITE flag
Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2022 17:20:58 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220316172058.c559efb14b1324ea52b708f8@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YjJ8wO4MVwSUMhd/@xz-m1.local>
On Thu, 17 Mar 2022 08:11:44 +0800 Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com> wrote:
> Hi, Andrew,
>
> On Wed, Mar 16, 2022 at 03:05:53PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> >
> > As I understand it, this patch (below) is still good to merge upstream,
> > although Peter hasn't acked it (please).
>
> Thanks for asking. I didn't ack because I saw that it's queued a long time
> ago into -mm, and also it's in -next for a long time too (my new uffd-wp
> patchset is rebased to this one already).
>
> I normally assume that means you read and ack that patch already, so if I
> didn't see anything obviously wrong I'll just keep silent. Please let me
> know if that's not the expected behavior..
Acks and reviews are always welcome. If they come in late, git tree
maintainer might not want to update and rebase, but it's still there in
the archives for people who click on the Link:.
> So here it is..
>
> Acked-by: Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com>
Thanks.
> >
> > And a whole bunch of followup patches are being thought about, but have
> > yet to eventuate.
>
> Is there a pointer/subject?
The messages in this thread. Several followup patches were discussed.
> >
> > Do we feel that this patch warrants the cc:stable? I'm suspecting
> > "no", as it isn't clear that the use-case is really legitimate at this
> > time?
>
> Right. Uffd-wp+mprotect usage is IMHO not a major use case for uffd-wp per
> my knowledge. At least I didn't even expect both work together, not until
> Nadav started working on some of the problems..
>
> Said that, for this specific case it should be literally only changing the
> behavior of anonymous UFFD-WP && !WRITE case but nothing else (please
> correct me otherwise..), then IMHO it's pretty safe to copy stable too
> especially for the cleanly applicable branches.
OK, thanks.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-03-17 0:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-02-17 21:16 [PATCH] userfaultfd: mark uffd_wp regardless of VM_WRITE flag Nadav Amit
2022-02-17 21:28 ` Nadav Amit
2022-02-18 1:58 ` Peter Xu
2022-02-18 2:23 ` Nadav Amit
2022-02-18 3:56 ` Peter Xu
2022-02-18 4:00 ` Nadav Amit
2022-02-18 4:05 ` Nadav Amit
2022-03-16 22:05 ` Andrew Morton
2022-03-17 0:11 ` Peter Xu
2022-03-17 0:20 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2022-02-21 6:23 ` Peter Xu
2022-02-28 18:31 ` Nadav Amit
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20220316172058.c559efb14b1324ea52b708f8@linux-foundation.org \
--to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=aarcange@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=nadav.amit@gmail.com \
--cc=peterx@redhat.com \
--cc=rppt@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).