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 475492BD58A; Wed, 3 Dec 2025 08:20:46 +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=1764750047; cv=none; b=sG4kKUsv3+lkP4YYD/+egE/zgkBKFEPw0ZldNkXjFfOr5Xjj4Ijx59h4uwpQ3MUk5m0HO80IHbzvn08ulKkWQNBngI9nGww9P7PNsRCSKe8KfiZkB4fSlg05j2T0HUWklaElUgSPFd/PD7o6TYEebzwv1CgP40h7cLH1UZtWbDY= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1764750047; c=relaxed/simple; bh=S0KFo/PIG0zyqfzbOOhhb6fhk0HqyRItHWtVwjF8GfI=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=XkS4Je/noZtQkr1REEMLQ/ZBWUaT3K1WuZ8uC+ctuAXFnG/+H098u/r8/sI/2SyFzHF4LlnBAjtqhNseK4i49uBdKhAWkusr/2ZfygGBbHU2YrFFO2YARzU/jhqd4+s6HWY3xtzHj9TWZZkcHhabgseWFlUJP+p8UVk2p6eCVB8= 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 1B547339; Wed, 3 Dec 2025 00:20:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from [10.57.45.92] (unknown [10.57.45.92]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 49CE33F73B; Wed, 3 Dec 2025 00:20:37 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <51339cdd-3c73-433c-abf7-24553e0fbd6b@arm.com> Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2025 09:20:34 +0100 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 v5 06/12] mm: introduce generic lazy_mmu helpers To: Alexander Gordeev Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Andreas Larsson , Andrew Morton , Boris Ostrovsky , Borislav Petkov , Catalin Marinas , Christophe Leroy , Dave Hansen , David Hildenbrand , "David S. Miller" , David Woodhouse , "H. Peter Anvin" , Ingo Molnar , Jann Horn , Juergen Gross , "Liam R. Howlett" , Lorenzo Stoakes , Madhavan Srinivasan , Michael Ellerman , Michal Hocko , Mike Rapoport , Nicholas Piggin , Peter Zijlstra , "Ritesh Harjani (IBM)" , Ryan Roberts , Suren Baghdasaryan , Thomas Gleixner , Venkat Rao Bagalkote , Vlastimil Babka , Will Deacon , Yeoreum Yun , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, sparclinux@vger.kernel.org, xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org, x86@kernel.org References: <20251124132228.622678-1-kevin.brodsky@arm.com> <20251124132228.622678-7-kevin.brodsky@arm.com> <07ffb66d-1e74-4634-bccb-75575b3862af-agordeev@linux.ibm.com> From: Kevin Brodsky Content-Language: en-GB In-Reply-To: <07ffb66d-1e74-4634-bccb-75575b3862af-agordeev@linux.ibm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 28/11/2025 14:50, Alexander Gordeev wrote: > Would it make sense to explicitly describe the policy wrt sleeping while > in lazy MMU mode? If I understand the conclusion of conversation right: > > * An arch implementation may disable preemption, but then it is arch > responsibility not to call any arch-specific code that might sleep; > * As result, while in lazy MMU mode the generic code should never > call a code that might sleep; I think that's a good summary, and I agree that the second point is not obvious from the comment in . This series it not making any change in that respect, but I'll add a clarification in this patch (or a separate patch). - Kevin