From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 75AA0FA3741 for ; Mon, 31 Oct 2022 04:55:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229629AbiJaEzS (ORCPT ); Mon, 31 Oct 2022 00:55:18 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:37436 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229457AbiJaEzQ (ORCPT ); Mon, 31 Oct 2022 00:55:16 -0400 Received: from mail-pg1-x529.google.com (mail-pg1-x529.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::529]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 606F6DC7 for ; Sun, 30 Oct 2022 21:55:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pg1-x529.google.com with SMTP id q1so9721534pgl.11 for ; Sun, 30 Oct 2022 21:55:15 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=to:references:message-id:content-transfer-encoding:cc:date :in-reply-to:from:subject:mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=6k9edOmi4jQnhndJM0oPHUDhd1xsqVU4YBKn2qnh9js=; b=YJFdZOx751Fhpcy/3SpXXpJ9lMBzwaS3Y4XPbXFsxxKVC1htuaUPzC1iANIyKCJhKF +KUL25Kv3HO+liKpWix91hA5OPOUONiFOf5CG1rVW88rislxfGhyZ1Y5PpZpL9UIhHr5 XYGzcgvbP1VtaHfpJ062p0YHy0zjg2payQtj+gIIuUUGAfNXoTtMCIVDGu0R6oVmGWOf CZMz8Obq+T6pUk8ywudqdUD7ypyaKXPkh+uOeehzOhEvis3Hmfd2me+3uWJtditI4NjM /AmqrNO+e8kfNSS+1OGg+27o3POPZToIwzp2QjYV04U7Vwo1pIyajIb0zP08WNyFKc4v thsQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=to:references:message-id:content-transfer-encoding:cc:date :in-reply-to:from:subject:mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=6k9edOmi4jQnhndJM0oPHUDhd1xsqVU4YBKn2qnh9js=; b=L26+qsl6QoWJhDr022utSvtEiGSUDzCcO+3jK2vUxwIiCqDL/4VnOPV+ok7RX9h1gs BqbgMzUyEZA0oUPZcvGufgx74/qqLMBbaxI8dWbSmScbPDH3HkgjONiG4UPi+EX4ehDf TZ+5cJzfwuIhlwYxnO3bQ5wvgsH2TFxPHCdG01TgaRsH2r13EYK6iL1OEksl31zB+Npj WPR2bAK1e46jbkkwZvtc7IUQp2EyIt08ZM24aSlzWRebND5v+3mgb+fPNNZxNgTUyMan j+2bf++Le5BPEzdHoZfrxmNFov9YHa3NBoPY/be6uEtxlAXWZ4IhJPDjnfTe2ilx1wv9 iHpA== X-Gm-Message-State: ACrzQf2B977SXfy9dKaF6gAC4dtyc1V1TEord728xIaEV3s+SiEvKALS B2LlNduJXxm8BCzVd6nq+8E= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AMsMyM5NM8Ob+41DG0FBkvAYtjDNB2Y4hmQC4/wy+TDcNA3sURXm8nAhJ3/oEVv/Ukoc4UOV58FXkQ== X-Received: by 2002:a63:2ad8:0:b0:46e:bb8e:b343 with SMTP id q207-20020a632ad8000000b0046ebb8eb343mr10999760pgq.408.1667192114710; Sun, 30 Oct 2022 21:55:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtpclient.apple (c-24-6-216-183.hsd1.ca.comcast.net. [24.6.216.183]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id b3-20020a1709027e0300b00176b3c9693esm3409135plm.299.2022.10.30.21.55.12 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Sun, 30 Oct 2022 21:55:13 -0700 (PDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 16.0 \(3696.120.41.1.1\)) Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/13] mm: Update ptep_get_lockless()s comment From: Nadav Amit In-Reply-To: Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2022 21:55:11 -0700 Cc: Peter Zijlstra , Jann Horn , John Hubbard , X86 ML , Matthew Wilcox , Andrew Morton , kernel list , Linux-MM , Andrea Arcangeli , "Kirill A . Shutemov" , jroedel@suse.de, ubizjak@gmail.com, Alistair Popple Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <20221022111403.531902164@infradead.org> <20221022114424.515572025@infradead.org> <2c800ed1-d17a-def4-39e1-09281ee78d05@nvidia.com> <6C548A9A-3AF3-4EC1-B1E5-47A7FFBEB761@gmail.com> <47678198-C502-47E1-B7C8-8A12352CDA95@gmail.com> <140B437E-B994-45B7-8DAC-E9B66885BEEF@gmail.com> To: Linus Torvalds X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3696.120.41.1.1) Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Oct 30, 2022, at 9:09 PM, Nadav Amit wrote: > I understand from the code that you decided to drop the deferring of > set_page_dirty(), which could - at least for the munmap case (where > mmap_lock is taken for write) - prevent the need for =E2=80=9Cforce_flus= h=E2=80=9D and > potentially save TLB flushes. >=20 > I was just wondering whether the reason for that is that you wanted > to have small backportable and conservative patches, or whether you > changed your mind about it. Please ignore this silly question. I understand - the buffers might = still be dropped.=