From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-pf1-f199.google.com (mail-pf1-f199.google.com [209.85.210.199]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 207F56B000A for ; Tue, 23 Oct 2018 08:25:45 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-pf1-f199.google.com with SMTP id r81-v6so734043pfk.11 for ; Tue, 23 Oct 2018 05:25:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org. [2607:7c80:54:e::133]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id y17-v6si1186765pgk.13.2018.10.23.05.25.43 for (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256); Tue, 23 Oct 2018 05:25:44 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2018 05:24:35 -0700 From: Matthew Wilcox Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] mm: Introduce new function vm_insert_kmem_page Message-ID: <20181023122435.GB20085@bombadil.infradead.org> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Souptick Joarder Cc: Miguel Ojeda , Russell King - ARM Linux , robin@protonic.nl, stefanr@s5r6.in-berlin.de, hjc@rock-chips.com, Heiko Stuebner , airlied@linux.ie, robin.murphy@arm.com, iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com, Andrew Morton , Marek Szyprowski , Kees Cook , treding@nvidia.com, Michal Hocko , Dan Williams , "Kirill A. Shutemov" , Mark Rutland , aryabinin@virtuozzo.com, Dmitry Vyukov , Kate Stewart , tchibo@google.com, riel@redhat.com, Minchan Kim , Peter Zijlstra , "Huang, Ying" , ak@linux.intel.com, rppt@linux.vnet.ibm.com, linux@dominikbrodowski.net, Arnd Bergmann , cpandya@codeaurora.org, hannes@cmpxchg.org, Joe Perches , mcgrof@kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux1394-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org, Linux-MM On Tue, Oct 23, 2018 at 05:44:32PM +0530, Souptick Joarder wrote: > On Sat, Oct 6, 2018 at 4:19 PM Miguel Ojeda > wrote: > > > > On Sat, Oct 6, 2018 at 7:11 AM Souptick Joarder wrote: > > > > > > On Fri, Oct 5, 2018 at 11:39 PM Miguel Ojeda > > > wrote: > > > > They are not supposed to be "steps". You did it with 70+ commits (!!) > > > > over the course of several months. Why a tree wasn't created, stuff > > > > developed there, and when done, submitted it for review? > > > > > > Because we already have a plan for entire vm_fault_t migration and > > > the * instruction * was to send one patch per driver. > > > > The instruction? > > Sorry for the delayed response. > Instruction from Matthew Wilcox who is supervising the entire vm_fault_t > migration work :-) Hang on. That was for the initial vm_fault_t conversion in which each step was clearly an improvement. What you're looking at now is far from that.