From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from foss.arm.com (foss.arm.com [217.140.110.172]) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA2B71E7666; Tue, 15 Oct 2024 11:35:29 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=217.140.110.172 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1728992131; cv=none; b=JC7vjwbeQO/Zn3sBy5sKAbKyCCSOHybQ6X3VwBEPJhqeRd9GlNn6rFViNYHUYTWLjW+4t0kMoDwpw7CGIn4FoofhzXWSdhLeEsin2p5/AGVkGsohT9y+RwIwUK08zjSk6xs+XZvojGapIR/Dq2EylaiQDXcJkbtdOT95DUE+QPk= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1728992131; c=relaxed/simple; bh=53rF6c5jakcS+ik3mitMUiEe/F1PijH5LdoA3YfLRmE=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=iiJneA6gQl2AQsm7VdfmYAbJuXRfVwheqAJWtDJdJK4ceUgIK/T4DLg9Pd+TlHtQtrS5h2dQ+i1VbFmPYmFtvB7JxsN771KmAcWvfPS0y8Zp9xlcMLsqCQoyKg5cm8lWlFIcJ+QwXey+a1lvO9qXQfg3InJmyrVjchnx83MjaPI= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=arm.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=arm.com; arc=none smtp.client-ip=217.140.110.172 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=arm.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=arm.com Received: from usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (unknown [10.121.207.14]) by usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 16B0B1007; Tue, 15 Oct 2024 04:35:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.57.86.207] (unknown [10.57.86.207]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id DE23D3F51B; Tue, 15 Oct 2024 04:35:24 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <6258fd24-e708-444b-88a3-792c14527817@arm.com> Date: Tue, 15 Oct 2024 12:35:23 +0100 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-sound@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v1 22/57] sound: Remove PAGE_SIZE compile-time constant assumption Content-Language: en-GB To: Mark Brown Cc: Andrew Morton , Anshuman Khandual , Ard Biesheuvel , Catalin Marinas , David Hildenbrand , Greg Marsden , Ivan Ivanov , Jaroslav Kysela , Kalesh Singh , Marc Zyngier , Mark Rutland , Matthias Brugger , Miroslav Benes , Takashi Iwai , Will Deacon , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-sound@vger.kernel.org References: <20241014105514.3206191-1-ryan.roberts@arm.com> <20241014105912.3207374-1-ryan.roberts@arm.com> <20241014105912.3207374-22-ryan.roberts@arm.com> <6926988e-5532-457f-9e1a-135b03585c5d@arm.com> From: Ryan Roberts In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 14/10/2024 17:01, Mark Brown wrote: > On Mon, Oct 14, 2024 at 01:24:02PM +0100, Ryan Roberts wrote: >> On 14/10/2024 12:38, Mark Brown wrote: >>> On Mon, Oct 14, 2024 at 11:58:29AM +0100, Ryan Roberts wrote: > >>>> ***NOTE*** >>>> Any confused maintainers may want to read the cover note here for context: >>>> https://lore.kernel.org/all/20241014105514.3206191-1-ryan.roberts@arm.com/ > >>> As documented in submitting-patches.rst please send patches to the >>> maintainers for the code you would like to change. The normal kernel >>> workflow is that people apply patches from their inboxes, if they aren't >>> copied they are likely to not see the patch at all and it is much more >>> difficult to apply patches. > >> Sure. I think you're implying that you would have liked to be in To: for this >> patch? I went to quite a lot of trouble to ensure all maintainers were at least >> in the To: field for patches touching their code. But get_maintainer.pl lists >> you as a supporter, not a maintainer when I ran this patch through. Could you >> clarify what would have been the correct thing to do? I could include all >> reviewers and supporters as well as maintainers but then I'd be banging up >> against the limits for some of the patches. > > The entry in MAINTAINERS for me is a M:, supporter is just the usual > get_maintainers noise. Supported is exactly equivalent to a maintainer. Ugh, In my head I always thought "supporter" was somebody who engaged with the subsystem but did not have an official role (like a football supporter). But now that I've gone and read the MAINTAINERS file, I see it's actually referring to status (supported vs maintained). Sorry about this. Due to this buggy filtering, I've missed a few others off other patches in this series. I'll fix that by forwarding to them. > Generally if you're going to filter people you should be filtering less > specific matches out rather than more and if you're looking to filter > very aggressively look at who actually commits changes to whatever > you're trying to change, less specific maintainers will generally > delegate down to the more specific ones. > >>> It's probably better to just use PAGE_SIZE_MAX here and avoid the >>> deferred patching, like the comment says we don't particularly care what >>> the value actually is here given that it's a dummy. > >> OK, so would that be: > >> .buffer_bytes_max = 128*1024, >> .period_bytes_min = PAGE_SIZE_MAX, <<<<< >> .period_bytes_max = PAGE_SIZE_MAX*2, <<<<< >> .periods_min = 2, >> .periods_max = 128, > >> It's not really clear to me how all the parameters interact; the buffer size >> 128K, which, if PAGE_SIZE_MAX is 64K, would hold 1 period of the maximum size. >> But periods_min is 2. So not sure that works? Or perhaps I'm trying to apply too >> much meaning to the param names... > > Like Takashi says just using absolute numbers here is probably just as > sensible, the numbers are there to stop userspace tripping over itself > but like I say it shouldn't ever get as far as actually using them for > anything. So long as we end up with some numbers that don't need any > late init patching the specifics aren't super important, the use of > PAGE_SIZE was kind of random. OK, I'll post a respin of this patch independently of the rest of the series, given it no longer has a dependency. Thanks, Ryan