From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail115-171.sinamail.sina.com.cn (mail115-171.sinamail.sina.com.cn [218.30.115.171]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4BCAD1CEACD for ; Tue, 14 Jan 2025 10:28:00 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=218.30.115.171 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1736850486; cv=none; b=oT5R92uosXxmEe1Bp+0a9dJ/PF0xI3YBrvlHNOZSwaMDU4Iu86OrlGt9/KM7xbJrFtg4RBPf2omtFapQcXylnHv6HAcJydKCNKUmSKfbxYYQOoS2d+aCFgLSgXPaSbwJChuBj24QtqVjkkuREkLjdgAUApMctFvt5MUDvqGt0tw= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1736850486; c=relaxed/simple; bh=v671fZfy4hbilZp1oQXNMtELb3/EP/PJMgEoEAE0wdM=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version; b=bHQUlVQIvui8PFxJZo8MF6RGVY6Ee6VUiDOz5N0u36QfgQRFslj66eJUmEfmXygESmx6G/SyqIgjaMaJpo9Gzt/lTa0uaIYWVunwBmGdVoetMxJlbmgZhUBky/vDTMviMviy5Gf9uTi/yZJMfY+xQdEp+RQl78hRtJuCu6fkKqI= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=sina.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=sina.com; arc=none smtp.client-ip=218.30.115.171 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=sina.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=sina.com X-SMAIL-HELO: localhost.localdomain Received: from unknown (HELO localhost.localdomain)([113.118.66.101]) by sina.com (10.185.250.24) with ESMTP id 67863C23000048EC; Tue, 14 Jan 2025 18:27:51 +0800 (CST) X-Sender: hdanton@sina.com X-Auth-ID: hdanton@sina.com Authentication-Results: sina.com; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=hdanton@sina.com; dkim=none header.i=none; dmarc=none action=none header.from=hdanton@sina.com X-SMAIL-MID: 8412510748298 X-SMAIL-UIID: AC5389B190B84A799A1B00FB11CF5C26-20250114-182751-1 From: Hillf Danton To: Andrew Morton , Suren Baghdasaryan Cc: Lorenzo Stoakes , peterz@infradead.org, hannes@cmpxchg.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Vlastimil Babka Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 00/17] reimplement per-vma lock as a refcount Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2025 18:27:36 +0800 Message-ID: <20250114102737.1815-1-hdanton@sina.com> In-Reply-To: <762df2fe-d57a-40b3-b921-47f5b6d84ba2@suse.cz> References: <20250111042604.3230628-1-surenb@google.com> <20250113174941.8c6d5defe18c8b1a7e477ace@linux-foundation.org> <20250113200908.d821636a39e9ca6130a90e24@linux-foundation.org> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit On Tue, 14 Jan 2025 10:09:42 +0100 Vlastimil Babka > On 1/14/25 05:09, Andrew Morton wrote: > > > > Well, I'm soliciting opinions here. What do others think? > > > > And do you see much urgency with these changes? > > I don't see the urgency and at this point giving it more time seems wise. > Seems like v10 won't be exactly trivial as we'll change from refcount_t to > atomic_t? And I'd like to see PeterZ review the lockdep parts too. +1