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 kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EB75ECD5BD1 for ; Mon, 1 Jun 2026 15:17:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 4D7086B0418; Mon, 1 Jun 2026 11:17:58 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 4AF456B0419; Mon, 1 Jun 2026 11:17:58 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 3EBF26B041A; Mon, 1 Jun 2026 11:17:58 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from relay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0016.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.16]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2E18B6B0418 for ; Mon, 1 Jun 2026 11:17:58 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin16.hostedemail.com (lb01a-stub [10.200.18.249]) by unirelay08.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B9F44140758 for ; Mon, 1 Jun 2026 15:17:57 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 84831698994.16.7F12A1D Received: from out-188.mta1.migadu.com (out-188.mta1.migadu.com [95.215.58.188]) by imf01.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 720EB40012 for ; Mon, 1 Jun 2026 15:17:53 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: imf01.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=linux.dev header.s=key1 header.b=qXQP2NCq; spf=pass (imf01.hostedemail.com: domain of baoquan.he@linux.dev designates 95.215.58.188 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=baoquan.he@linux.dev; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=linux.dev ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=hostedemail.com; s=arc-20220608; cv=none; t=1780327076; b=Sa1j5WahoSA6o3H5Vvwvu2n1RgIwJZElV8465s4zzf5/D9Xuu/mB7/T91wP7EsNB929xaf ekhpEDtqNerb+VVxD/g9Cf+6bKfniyXyCu8aFhBRtSqqwHsCPvf0upbIUUrDx8pFN+LKWd yc5uUEN16N2mXZxPPxbnocuSBrnCRbQ= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; imf01.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=linux.dev header.s=key1 header.b=qXQP2NCq; spf=pass (imf01.hostedemail.com: domain of baoquan.he@linux.dev designates 95.215.58.188 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=baoquan.he@linux.dev; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=linux.dev ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hostedemail.com; s=arc-20220608; t=1780327076; h=from:from:sender:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references:dkim-signature; bh=rg8W/hYbHAM0ri3fHmP8kcrGaridwiZvmSeuHaJAFAQ=; b=cnjKc05euVl1u/vxgdr6LwDhnBI38w19tug1Ka/J1303H7kwWL45sQBN3X2I06LKZd8UiW VBqv1r+wJPWqTtnzLp+m4ugdf+Bv0y3O0wd/zNI0+T6mk+hfsRYfd1hE5+RZfsik+1QFkR fsR/cnEB4tyjds/thv+5DvQUkyPUjkk= Date: Mon, 1 Jun 2026 23:17:28 +0800 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linux.dev; s=key1; t=1780327071; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=rg8W/hYbHAM0ri3fHmP8kcrGaridwiZvmSeuHaJAFAQ=; b=qXQP2NCqrCi/beAD/X/kA5YVxzqKAKGVPCXDe8V3yvjNpsrsCnawqV+r/2N0c+KHA3fpEn YD60vd/74ryuvgbDxfL6m9trsOJJS+WmMHjZJk4GmaLvHZzx/Ba+ypXUKmv+vyVv+YEZj1 lIJWOrwHrhVOX+iwLDnSdH5AuzbU39s= X-Report-Abuse: Please report any abuse attempt to abuse@migadu.com and include these headers. From: Baoquan He To: Christoph Hellwig Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, chrisl@kernel.org, usama.arif@linux.dev, kasong@tencent.com, nphamcs@gmail.com, shikemeng@huaweicloud.com, youngjun.park@lge.com, linux-mm@kvack.org Subject: Re: better block swap batching and a different take on swap_ops v2 Message-ID: References: <20260601113449.3464734-1-hch@lst.de> <20260601145053.GA5268@lst.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20260601145053.GA5268@lst.de> X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_OUT X-Rspamd-Server: rspam11 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 720EB40012 X-Rspam-User: X-Stat-Signature: fcbqcw1bgrbkhd1rx76ze6zgjg3spcea X-HE-Tag: 1780327073-742296 X-HE-Meta: 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 63mh4ajF frjEs69HDCIK2/4k3MPwwUk5Sucdfb8hF+nW2eD9ZV4ds48ROFLWCrmU92us0WhYdnKpUnz8gxjGtb9NOIdRD4REhTEe2uGyBIyNYBVXaEugE5Y0MCBphRQQbP/OAo/YeRdYiW29ovaTAHvI3f+U+/1hwbfBlGnQDK1oe/CsJOFxj+4QklAYFXJoVfz1Yu6Uq3HgHr0N//sFP7+4md4c82ZQMplJd8yt80VLwBuILLdgXhcN6Neko0DE3KV1LIqcgx2A+dbjjGz7zh9cJnC8TZIDdaA++mq8FPYUl1Kr7plHaljIDB6JCBc1GX+OAInx5srr603BdZBzOuBJc1zqH7AZZ3Q== Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: On 06/01/26 at 04:50pm, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Mon, Jun 01, 2026 at 09:29:30PM +0800, Baoquan He wrote: > > > this series makes use of the swap_iocb for block as well so that it > > > doesn't do inefficient single-bio I/O, and then rebases the swap_ops > > > from Baoquan on top of the now very different method structure. > > > > What tree is this series based on? I tried the latest mainline, > > linux-next main branch and Andrew's mm-unstable, all failed. > > The base is: > > commit e1af79f3291a268adf4e149e1faba3052743e898 (akpm/mm-unstable) > Author: Joshua Hahn > Date: Fri May 29 13:27:54 2026 -0700 > > mm/nodemask: correctly describe nodemask operation return types Thanks. And seems the patchset pulled back via b4 only contains the patch 1~5/8 and patch 8/8, it misses 6~7/8. Just in case if someone else also use b4 and meets the similar issue when applying patches. This could be related to the email sending tool or its settings. > > > > And by the way, usually we add version number in each patch's subject as > > "[PATCH v2] xxx ". > > That does sometimes happen but is rather unusual if you take a quick > look over lkml. It also isn't the default for any normal patch > sending tool. Really, what I have seen are all this kind of format, but surely I could see too few. Anyway, it doesn't matter much. Thanks.