Re: [PATCH v3 0/4] mm: improve large folio readahead and alignment for exec memory

Usama Arif
2026-04-10T12:06:05Z

On 10/04/2026 12:55, Lorenzo Stoakes wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 10, 2026 at 12:03:03PM +0100, Usama Arif wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 02/04/2026 19:08, Usama Arif wrote:
>>> v2 -> v3: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20260320140315.979307-1-usama.arif@linux.dev/
>>> - Take into account READ_ONLY_THP_FOR_FS for elf alignment by aligning
>>> to HPAGE_PMD_SIZE limited to 2M (Rui)
>>> - Reviewed-by tags for patch 1 from Kiryl and Jan
>>> - Remove preferred_exec_order() (Jan)
>>> - Change ra->order to HPAGE_PMD_ORDER if vma_pages(vma) >= HPAGE_PMD_NR
>>> otherwise use exec_folio_order() with gfp &= ~__GFP_RECLAIM for
>>> do_sync_mmap_readahead().
>>> - Change exec_folio_order() to return 2M (cont-pte size) for 64K base
>>> page size for arm64.
>>> - remove bprm->file NULL check (Matthew)
>>> - Change filp to file (Matthew)
>>> - Improve checking of p_vaddr and p_vaddr (Rui and Matthew)
>>>
>>
>> Hello!
>>
>> Just wanted to check if there was any feedback/review on the latest
>> revision?
>
> It's -rc7, this is definitely something for next cycle :)
>

Yeah no worries! Just wanted to check what people thought about it!

> On my part, my upstream bandwidth has drastically reduced, and review is
> probably going to have to be a hobbyist thing at least for now.
>
> Also, not to be mean but:
>
> $ git log -E -i --grep "(Reviewed|Acked)-by: Usama Arif" --oneline | wc -l
> 21
>
> So... :)
>
> Review in mm is very lop-sided, let's try to balance it out a bit!
>

Ah yeah actually I have been reviewing a lot over the last few months.
I dont ack patches that have already been acked-by/reviewed-by maintainers.
as I am not sure if it adds anything. I never really cared about Reviewed/Acked
by/patch count but I can start adding tags if it helps in stats.

The reviews I have done over the last week alone: