From: Breno Leitao <leitao@debian.org>
To: Mateusz Guzik <mjguzik@gmail.com>
Cc: Alexander Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org>,
oleg@redhat.com, josh@joshtriplett.org, Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>,
jlayton@kernel.org, axboe@kernel.dk, shakeel.butt@linux.dev,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
kernel-team@meta.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/4] fs/pipe: unify the page pools into a single per-pipe pool
Date: Wed, 8 Jul 2026 08:54:57 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ak5yfhm1qA2E4ntV@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAGudoHGAg2s37LeJzZTKTyQS4fARSdipcis-76b25x7XnWoZiw@mail.gmail.com>
On Wed, Jul 08, 2026 at 05:24:47PM +0200, Mateusz Guzik wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 8, 2026 at 5:11 PM Breno Leitao <leitao@debian.org> wrote:
> > That said, your approach is better than what I had, and I would like to
> > integrate it to this patch set. Os it OK if I give a Co-developed-with:
> > tag?
>
> imo this is too trivial compared to the entirety of the patchset to
> warrant attribution. Just take it.
>
> To be clear, I just now verified avoidance of the extra trip resolved
> the regression for me so I have no objections to the patchset.
>
> For completeness I note I failed to remove the lock acquire in
> anon_pipe_trim_pool_and_unlock, but I presume you noticed (at worst
> while testing).
yes, otherwise it was self deadlocking it self in AA scenario.
> One suggestion I have is to post the entire thing as one patch as I
> don't think the split here buys anything, but I'm not going to insist
> one way or the other.
Ack, I splitted the changes hoping it would make the review easier.
So, I will respin this with your suggestion in a single patch, after
some bake time (probably tomorrow).
prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-07-08 15:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-07-07 15:04 [PATCH v2 0/4] fs/pipe: unify the page pools into a single per-pipe pool Breno Leitao
2026-07-07 15:04 ` [PATCH v2 1/4] fs/pipe: move the prealloc pool to per-pipe infrastructure Breno Leitao
2026-07-07 15:04 ` [PATCH v2 2/4] fs/pipe: add per-pipe pool push, prefill and trim helpers Breno Leitao
2026-07-07 15:05 ` [PATCH v2 3/4] fs/pipe: switch the read and write paths to the per-pipe pool Breno Leitao
2026-07-07 15:05 ` [PATCH v2 4/4] fs/pipe: remove the old on-stack prealloc helpers and tmp_page[2] Breno Leitao
2026-07-07 15:29 ` [PATCH v2 0/4] fs/pipe: unify the page pools into a single per-pipe pool Mateusz Guzik
2026-07-08 12:09 ` Breno Leitao
2026-07-08 13:18 ` Mateusz Guzik
2026-07-08 15:11 ` Breno Leitao
2026-07-08 15:24 ` Mateusz Guzik
2026-07-08 15:54 ` Breno Leitao [this message]
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=ak5yfhm1qA2E4ntV@gmail.com \
--to=leitao@debian.org \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=brauner@kernel.org \
--cc=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=jlayton@kernel.org \
--cc=josh@joshtriplett.org \
--cc=kernel-team@meta.com \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mjguzik@gmail.com \
--cc=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=shakeel.butt@linux.dev \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
/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