From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S933185AbdBVPPv (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Wed, 22 Feb 2017 10:15:51 -0500
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:44290 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com"
        rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
        id S933135AbdBVPPK (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Wed, 22 Feb 2017 10:15:10 -0500
Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2017 16:15:07 +0100
From: Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>
To: "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@shutemov.name>
Cc: Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@oracle.com>, linux-mm@kvack.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        "Dr. David Alan Gilbert" <dgilbert@redhat.com>,
        Hillf Danton <hillf.zj@alibaba-inc.com>,
        Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@parallels.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] userfaultfd: hugetlbfs: add UFFDIO_COPY support for
 shared mappings
Message-ID: <20170222151507.GI5037@redhat.com>
References: <1487195210-12839-1-git-send-email-mike.kravetz@oracle.com>
 <20170216184100.GS25530@redhat.com>
 <20170221132545.GD13174@node.shutemov.name>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20170221132545.GD13174@node.shutemov.name>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.7.2 (2016-11-26)
X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.5.16 (mx1.redhat.com [10.5.110.30]); Wed, 22 Feb 2017 15:15:10 +0000 (UTC)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Tue, Feb 21, 2017 at 04:25:45PM +0300, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
> I think more strict vma_is_anonymous() is a good thing.
> 
> But I don't see a point introducing one more helper. Let's just make the
> existing helper work better.

That would be simpler agreed. The point of having an "unsafe" faster
version was only for code running in page fault context where the
additional check is unnecessary.