Re: [PATCH v9 00/17] reimplement per-vma lock as a refcount

Andrew Morton
2025-01-14T04:09:10Z

On Mon, 13 Jan 2025 18:53:11 -0800 Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com> wrote:

> On Mon, Jan 13, 2025 at 5:49 PM Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
> >
> >
> > Yes, we're at -rc7 and this series is rather in panic mode and it seems
> > unnecessarily risky so I'm inclined to set it aside for this cycle.
> >
> > If the series is considered super desirable and if people are confident
> > that we can address any remaining glitches during two months of -rc
> > then sure, we could push the envelope a bit. But I don't believe this
> > is the case so I'm thinking let's give ourselves another cycle to get
> > this all sorted out?
>
> I didn't think this series was in panic mode with one real issue that
> is not hard to address (memory ordering in
> __refcount_inc_not_zero_limited()) but I'm obviously biased and might
> be missing the big picture. In any case, if it makes people nervous I
> have no objections to your plan.

Well, I'm soliciting opinions here. What do others think?

And do you see much urgency with these changes?