From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from szxga06-in.huawei.com (szxga06-in.huawei.com [45.249.212.32]) (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 8049D1B85DB; Thu, 24 Oct 2024 11:39:24 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=45.249.212.32 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1729769967; cv=none; b=Gad1LsIum69j3CiQaSqdmSgnz51ucyiE/pKW24lFAJo7at1T/7o9Q0xTc9a83Q1YRFWzpObNkg/NzJr3r7VwjLppnXebqSr1f7MzduZNlwlIZuDJSmNowUQoqM7pHYZIHe6f9oCK2YCB5/XroHjqvprSpGvYUokvvP67SmJlU6w= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1729769967; c=relaxed/simple; bh=KwBiN5rgNTlmkT22f6vVpY6v7mrOcGjlI7NoYPdSbxk=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:CC:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=gJbKhZtQ1ZdT3dBa7FawXpHyfsVe2vnAOJOCxUUCvUSzVCP7NTa/D0s84QAMfMIDwoINgvE1t/9yzZHC9vnRaXQ/ncn+3hL+bMJntMRmGW1g2XDRkHOWjpZx6LpcbA3SlYWrB/fdRxHsfafr/Cmmu9hhVzeOk2nHGc5/FJ6N0p0= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=huawei.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=huawei.com; arc=none smtp.client-ip=45.249.212.32 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=huawei.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=huawei.com Received: from mail.maildlp.com (unknown [172.19.163.17]) by szxga06-in.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTP id 4XZ3q40sxlz1ynQl; Thu, 24 Oct 2024 19:39:28 +0800 (CST) Received: from dggpemf200006.china.huawei.com (unknown [7.185.36.61]) by mail.maildlp.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A0DA01A0188; Thu, 24 Oct 2024 19:39:20 +0800 (CST) Received: from [10.67.120.129] (10.67.120.129) by dggpemf200006.china.huawei.com (7.185.36.61) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.2.1544.11; Thu, 24 Oct 2024 19:39:20 +0800 Message-ID: Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2024 19:39:20 +0800 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v22 00/14] Replace page_frag with page_frag_cache for sk_page_frag() To: Paolo Abeni , Yunsheng Lin , Andrew Morton CC: , , Shuah Khan , Eric Dumazet , Alexander Duyck , , , References: <20241018105351.1960345-1-linyunsheng@huawei.com> <02d4971c-a906-44e8-b694-bd54a89cf671@gmail.com> Content-Language: en-US From: Yunsheng Lin In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-ClientProxiedBy: dggems704-chm.china.huawei.com (10.3.19.181) To dggpemf200006.china.huawei.com (7.185.36.61) On 2024/10/24 17:05, Paolo Abeni wrote: > Hi, > > I just noted MM maintainer and ML was not CC on the cover-letter (but > they were on the relevant patches), adding them now. > > On 10/19/24 10:27, Yunsheng Lin wrote: >> On 10/19/2024 1:39 AM, Alexander Duyck wrote: >>> So I still think this set should be split in half in order to make >>> this easier to review. The ones I have provided a review-by for so far >>> seem fine to me. I really think if you just submitted that batch first >>> we can get that landed and let them stew in the kernel for a bit to >>> make sure we didn't miss anything there. >> >> It makes sense to me too that it might be better to get those submitted >> to get more testing if there is no more comment about it. >> >> I am guessing they should be targetting net-next tree to get more >> testing as all the callers of page_frag API seem to be in the >> networking, right? >> >> Hi, David, Jakub & Paolo >> It would be good if those patches are just cherry-picked from this >> patchset as those patches with 'Reviewed-by' tag seem to be applying >> cleanly. Or any better suggestion here? > > We can cherry pick the patches from the posted series, applying the > review tags as needed, but we need an explicit ack from the mm Thanks. I would be good to cherry pick the below one too, as it has also a 'Reviewed-by' tag. I mentioned that it might be easier to miss that one because it sits after one without 'Reviewed-by' and it seems to be also applied cleanly: [net-next,v22,08/14] mm: page_frag: use __alloc_pages() to replace alloc_pages_node() https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/netdevbpf/patch/20241018105351.1960345-9-linyunsheng@huawei.com/ > maintainer, given the mentioned patches touch mostly such code. Sorry for missing to cc Andrew and MM ML. Maybe I should have mentioned that Andrew provided an 'Acked-by' in patch 2, but it is always safer to double check it. > > I would like to avoid repeating a recent incident of unintentionally > stepping on other subsystem toes. > > @Andrew: are you ok with the above plan? > > Thank you, > > Paolo > >