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 bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (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 A8815C433EF for ; Mon, 21 Mar 2022 18:29:00 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20210309; h=Sender: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post: List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:References: Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description: Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID: List-Owner; bh=4EB4IgYenveeg1D7UtZSjGO8FW3q6du9v1jJ0juj4k8=; b=LkKNAUrxhw90FF yusazJC78df2Tlx5VlPIa2G2xmxrag7jqMDS1XfFxZ+R8HRL5//wn/xiUTtHHnNj8DgIi7U6M2MDl 2OIJB53390dWOOdMg1v/cQVYRXl4lmptXU71kDRxxwweGkVfA6e4J4+mey+jjHp+QY7NvpqhzVff/ 2rDURWsfBJg/E8ej+tl+qtF1BF/TXvz1qKugQWbDdTOOgSoOmrj1LJpApPTVug8tSF5xkkoU0ZkP8 Z4+8ZLFjT11BdlxBmf8VufCHWOLQb3QOQEWjByqYXKbhHBw2U3JuH+6CA5ENQ9LpgZCoJECPVp6yh KjnJEqcAcKRTDHYpQ3GA==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.94.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1nWMku-008k76-Vt; Mon, 21 Mar 2022 18:27:49 +0000 Received: from dfw.source.kernel.org ([2604:1380:4641:c500::1]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.94.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1nWMkr-008k5b-MN for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Mon, 21 Mar 2022 18:27:47 +0000 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (relay.kernel.org [52.25.139.140]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by dfw.source.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0F9D0614F9; Mon, 21 Mar 2022 18:27:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 0287DC340E8; Mon, 21 Mar 2022 18:27:36 +0000 (UTC) Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2022 18:27:33 +0000 From: Catalin Marinas To: Will Deacon Cc: David Hildenbrand , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Andrew Morton , Hugh Dickins , Linus Torvalds , David Rientjes , Shakeel Butt , John Hubbard , Jason Gunthorpe , Mike Kravetz , Mike Rapoport , Yang Shi , "Kirill A . Shutemov" , Matthew Wilcox , Vlastimil Babka , Jann Horn , Michal Hocko , Nadav Amit , Rik van Riel , Roman Gushchin , Andrea Arcangeli , Peter Xu , Donald Dutile , Christoph Hellwig , Oleg Nesterov , Jan Kara , Liang Zhang , Pedro Gomes , Oded Gabbay , Michael Ellerman , Benjamin Herrenschmidt , Paul Mackerras , Heiko Carstens , Vasily Gorbik , Alexander Gordeev , Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , Borislav Petkov , Dave Hansen , linux-mm@kvack.org, x86@kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 4/7] arm64/pgtable: support __HAVE_ARCH_PTE_SWP_EXCLUSIVE Message-ID: References: <20220315141837.137118-1-david@redhat.com> <20220315141837.137118-5-david@redhat.com> <20220321143802.GC11145@willie-the-truck> <20220321174404.GA11389@willie-the-truck> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20220321174404.GA11389@willie-the-truck> X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20220321_112745_790937_72EFB7EC X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 17.23 ) X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org On Mon, Mar 21, 2022 at 05:44:05PM +0000, Will Deacon wrote: > On Mon, Mar 21, 2022 at 04:07:48PM +0100, David Hildenbrand wrote: > > So the example you gave cannot possibly have that bit set. From what I > > understand, it should be fine. But I have no real preference: I can also > > just stick to the original patch, whatever you prefer. > > I think I'd prefer to stay on the safe side and stick with bit 2 as you > originally proposed. If we need to support crazy numbers of swapfiles > in future then we can revisit the idea of allocating bit 1. Sounds fine to me. David, feel free to keep my reviewed-by on the original patch. -- Catalin _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel