From: Oliver Upton <oliver.upton@linux.dev>
To: David Matlack <dmatlack@google.com>
Cc: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>,
Anish Moorthy <amoorthy@google.com>,
jthoughton@google.com, kvm@vger.kernel.org, maz@kernel.org
Subject: Re: [WIP Patch v2 00/14] Avoiding slow get-user-pages via memory fault exit
Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2023 18:54:09 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZBS3UbrWFZJzLzOq@linux.dev> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CALzav=dBJyr373jnBF_-uLJfZMwHOsKSVSR2u4xr83etjp6Daw@mail.gmail.com>
David,
On Fri, Mar 17, 2023 at 11:46:58AM -0700, David Matlack wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 17, 2023 at 11:13 AM Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Mar 17, 2023, Oliver Upton wrote:
> > > On Wed, Mar 15, 2023 at 02:17:24AM +0000, Anish Moorthy wrote:
> > > > Hi Sean, here's what I'm planing to send up as v2 of the scalable
> > > > userfaultfd series.
> > >
> > > I don't see a ton of value in sending a targeted posting of a series to the
> > > list.
>
> But isn't it already generating value as you were able to weigh in and
> provide feedback on technical aspects that you would not have been
> otherwise able to if Anish had just messaged Sean?
No, I only happened upon this series looking at lore. My problem is that
none of the affected maintainers or reviewers were cc'ed on the series.
> > > IOW, just CC all of the appropriate reviewers+maintainers. I promise,
> > > we won't bite.
>
> I disagree. While I think it's fine to reach out to someone off-list
> to discuss a specific question, if you're going to message all
> reviewers and maintainers, you should also CC the mailing list. That
> allows more people to follow along and weigh in if necessary.
I think there may be a slight disconnect here :) I'm in no way encouraging
off-list discussion and instead asking that mail on the list arrives in
the right folks' inboxes.
Posting an RFC on the list was absolutely the right thing to do.
> >
> > +1. And though I discourage off-list review, if something is really truly not
> > ready for public review, e.g. will do more harm than good by causing confusing,
> > then just send the patches off-list. Half measures like this will just make folks
> > grumpy.
>
> In this specific case, Anish very clearly laid out the reason for
> sending the patches and asked very specific directed questions in the
> cover letter and called it out as WIP. Yes "WIP" should have been
> "RFC" but other than that should anything have been different?
See above
--
Thanks,
Oliver
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-03-17 18:54 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 60+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-03-15 2:17 [WIP Patch v2 00/14] Avoiding slow get-user-pages via memory fault exit Anish Moorthy
2023-03-15 2:17 ` [WIP Patch v2 01/14] KVM: selftests: Allow many vCPUs and reader threads per UFFD in demand paging test Anish Moorthy
2023-03-15 2:17 ` [WIP Patch v2 02/14] KVM: selftests: Use EPOLL in userfaultfd_util reader threads and signal errors via TEST_ASSERT Anish Moorthy
2023-03-15 2:17 ` [WIP Patch v2 03/14] KVM: Allow hva_pfn_fast to resolve read-only faults Anish Moorthy
2023-03-15 2:17 ` [WIP Patch v2 04/14] KVM: x86: Add KVM_CAP_X86_MEMORY_FAULT_EXIT and associated kvm_run field Anish Moorthy
2023-03-17 0:02 ` Isaku Yamahata
2023-03-17 18:33 ` Anish Moorthy
2023-03-17 19:30 ` Oliver Upton
2023-03-17 21:50 ` Sean Christopherson
2023-03-17 22:44 ` Anish Moorthy
2023-03-20 15:53 ` Sean Christopherson
2023-03-20 18:19 ` Anish Moorthy
2023-03-20 22:11 ` Anish Moorthy
2023-03-21 15:21 ` Sean Christopherson
2023-03-21 18:01 ` Anish Moorthy
2023-03-21 19:43 ` Sean Christopherson
2023-03-22 21:06 ` Anish Moorthy
2023-03-22 23:17 ` Sean Christopherson
2023-03-28 22:19 ` Anish Moorthy
2023-04-04 19:34 ` Sean Christopherson
2023-04-04 20:40 ` Anish Moorthy
2023-04-04 22:07 ` Sean Christopherson
2023-04-05 20:21 ` Anish Moorthy
2023-03-17 18:35 ` Oliver Upton
2023-03-15 2:17 ` [WIP Patch v2 05/14] KVM: x86: Implement memory fault exit for direct_map Anish Moorthy
2023-03-15 2:17 ` [WIP Patch v2 06/14] KVM: x86: Implement memory fault exit for kvm_handle_page_fault Anish Moorthy
2023-03-15 2:17 ` [WIP Patch v2 07/14] KVM: x86: Implement memory fault exit for setup_vmgexit_scratch Anish Moorthy
2023-03-15 2:17 ` [WIP Patch v2 08/14] KVM: x86: Implement memory fault exit for FNAME(fetch) Anish Moorthy
2023-03-15 2:17 ` [WIP Patch v2 09/14] KVM: Introduce KVM_CAP_MEMORY_FAULT_NOWAIT without implementation Anish Moorthy
2023-03-17 18:59 ` Oliver Upton
2023-03-17 20:15 ` Anish Moorthy
2023-03-17 20:54 ` Sean Christopherson
2023-03-17 23:42 ` Anish Moorthy
2023-03-20 15:13 ` Sean Christopherson
2023-03-20 19:53 ` Anish Moorthy
2023-03-17 20:17 ` Sean Christopherson
2023-03-20 22:22 ` Oliver Upton
2023-03-21 14:50 ` Sean Christopherson
2023-03-21 20:23 ` Oliver Upton
2023-03-21 21:01 ` Sean Christopherson
2023-03-15 2:17 ` [WIP Patch v2 10/14] KVM: x86: Implement KVM_CAP_MEMORY_FAULT_NOWAIT Anish Moorthy
2023-03-17 0:32 ` Isaku Yamahata
2023-03-15 2:17 ` [WIP Patch v2 11/14] KVM: arm64: Allow user_mem_abort to return 0 to signal a 'normal' exit Anish Moorthy
2023-03-17 18:18 ` Oliver Upton
2023-03-15 2:17 ` [WIP Patch v2 12/14] KVM: arm64: Implement KVM_CAP_MEMORY_FAULT_NOWAIT Anish Moorthy
2023-03-17 18:27 ` Oliver Upton
2023-03-17 19:00 ` Anish Moorthy
2023-03-17 19:03 ` Oliver Upton
2023-03-17 19:24 ` Sean Christopherson
2023-03-15 2:17 ` [WIP Patch v2 13/14] KVM: selftests: Add memslot_flags parameter to memstress_create_vm Anish Moorthy
2023-03-15 2:17 ` [WIP Patch v2 14/14] KVM: selftests: Handle memory fault exits in demand_paging_test Anish Moorthy
2023-03-17 17:43 ` [WIP Patch v2 00/14] Avoiding slow get-user-pages via memory fault exit Oliver Upton
2023-03-17 18:13 ` Sean Christopherson
2023-03-17 18:46 ` David Matlack
2023-03-17 18:54 ` Oliver Upton [this message]
2023-03-17 18:59 ` David Matlack
2023-03-17 19:53 ` Anish Moorthy
2023-03-17 22:03 ` Sean Christopherson
2023-03-20 15:56 ` Sean Christopherson
2023-03-17 20:35 ` Sean Christopherson
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=ZBS3UbrWFZJzLzOq@linux.dev \
--to=oliver.upton@linux.dev \
--cc=amoorthy@google.com \
--cc=dmatlack@google.com \
--cc=jthoughton@google.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=maz@kernel.org \
--cc=seanjc@google.com \
/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).