Re: [RFC PATCH v2 00/13] mm: rework anon_vma and remove anon_vma_chain

["David Hildenbrand (Arm)" <david@kernel.org>]

On 7/8/26 05:26, wangtao wrote:
>>> At first, I thought I was the only one who found anon_vma hard to
>>> understand. After reading your earlier email, I realized that many people
>> also consider it difficult to follow.
>>
>> Right, that's how Lorenzo started his work, trying to replace/remove
>> anon_vma entirely.
>>
>> So I tried a different approach and implemented
>>> anon_vma rmap using a simpler doubly linked list plus depth mechanism.
>>
>> And this is what I don't understand. You were told that Lorenzo is working on
>> removing anon_vma, yet you decided to work on + send something that
>> reworks anon_vma?
>>
>> Also, I am really curious about your expectation: not having a single patch
>> contributed to MM, even worse, not a single RB tag or anything, yet you
>> rework one of the most complicated part of MM repeatedly using other
>> complicated approaches, and immediately start demand technical discussions?
>> After sending an absolute horrible v1?
>>
>> I really try to be a nice person, but really, am I dreaming?
>>
> 
> It’s simple: optimize memory usage and share it with the community.

Yes, and you can work on whatever you want, and share it with people as much as
you like.

But RFC literally means "Requests For Comments", not "hey, I hacked something
together, maybe this could be useful at some point".

-- 
Cheers,

David