Re: [PATCH -tip v2 0/4] x86,mm/pat: Move towards using generic interval tree

[Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net>]

ping?

With another week of rc, can this still make it for v5.5?

Thanks,
Davidlohr

On Mon, 21 Oct 2019, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:

>Changes from v1[0]:
> - Got rid of more code in patch 1 by using the end - 1 for closed
>   intervals, instead of keeping the overlap-check.
>
> - added an additional cleanup patch.
>
>Hi,
>
>I'm sending this series again in this format as the interval tree
>node conversion will, at a minimum, take longer than hoped for
>(ie: Jason still removing interval tree users for the mmu_notifier
>rework[1]). There is also a chance this will never see be done.
>
>As such, I'm resending this series (where patch 1 is the only
>interesting one and which Ingo acked previously, with the exception
>that the nodes remain fully closed). In the future, it would be
>trivial to port pat tree to semi open nodes, but for now think that
>it makes sense to just get the pat changes in.
>
>Please consider for v5.5. Thanks!
>
>[0] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20190813224620.31005-1-dave@stgolabs.net/
>[1] https://marc.info/?l=linux-mm&m=157116340411211
>
>Davidlohr Bueso (4):
>  x86/mm, pat: Convert pat tree to generic interval tree
>  x86,mm/pat: Cleanup some of the local memtype_rb_* calls
>  x86,mm/pat: Drop rbt suffix from external memtype calls
>  x86/mm, pat:  Rename pat_rbtree.c to pat_interval.c
>
> arch/x86/mm/pat.c          |   8 +-
> arch/x86/mm/pat_internal.h |  20 ++--
> arch/x86/mm/pat_interval.c | 186 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> arch/x86/mm/pat_rbtree.c   | 268 ---------------------------------------------
> 4 files changed, 200 insertions(+), 282 deletions(-)
> create mode 100644 arch/x86/mm/pat_interval.c
> delete mode 100644 arch/x86/mm/pat_rbtree.c
>
>--
>2.16.4
>