[PATCH v2] mm: Introduce new function vm_insert_kmem_page

[miguel.ojeda.sandonis@gmail.com (Miguel Ojeda)]

Hi Souptick,

On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 8:49 PM Souptick Joarder <jrdr.linux@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 11:47 PM Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org> wrote:
> >
> > I think this is a bad plan.  What we should rather do is examine the current
> > users of vm_insert_page() and ask "What interface would better replace
> > vm_insert_page()?"
> >
> > As I've said to you before, I believe the right answer is to have a
> > vm_insert_range() which takes an array of struct page pointers.  That
> > fits the majority of remaining users.
>
> Ok, but it will take some time.
> Is it a good idea to introduce the final vm_fault_t patch and then
> start working on vm_insert_range as it will be bit time consuming ?
>

Well, why is there a rush? Development should be done in a patch
series or a tree, and submitted as a whole, instead of sending partial
patches.

Also, not sure if you saw my comments/review: if the interface is not
going to change, why the name change? Why can't we simply keep using
vm_insert_page?

Cheers,
Miguel