From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from casper.infradead.org (casper.infradead.org [90.155.50.34]) (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 24D07261B92 for ; Wed, 11 Feb 2026 21:54:12 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=90.155.50.34 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1770846856; cv=none; b=kGuZsaoOMiwdQfqj661hGpoY3vcr1fMQH7RvFdzLEDZZwLAcFMSsPff05wGld488Kz3qcb1xGK/m/LKRr03X0IK+XkgETd2T0tOUnXzglXUA0sY/ElFMxQ6iK7Kc/fEp0j4x7MsRrilAQ8KNXMXvX4Fn7w2gnrGSpA7GLVLkd5Y= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1770846856; c=relaxed/simple; bh=Kn0iWjgGyDOoENbZOlxNzN/jbx7O6SFE2ijwIZyiTik=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=E6tm7YTEZPgSbdeHlUw9SW1NvriIVV0HTaDIVPXsmIn8wm12oFr9cY7NJn6ltBlxy/cg8unpLBCbA3MwOCnxdg7CMZZRK2VRX7JM9B/xKO3wo6JsFLJRZ78Z86FCeIKAKAKJkbPeL/tFPhACChovqXF0rScU29uOuDP3cMoWWHw= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=infradead.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=infradead.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=infradead.org header.i=@infradead.org header.b=t1oDornp; arc=none smtp.client-ip=90.155.50.34 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=infradead.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=infradead.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=infradead.org header.i=@infradead.org header.b="t1oDornp" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=infradead.org; s=casper.20170209; h=In-Reply-To:Content-Type:MIME-Version: References:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Sender:Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description; bh=KUh3UhYVLxnVGTyEmDq0tNLkmtCDXwkX7nTOeGCvg0k=; b=t1oDornp7NQDlvItNaK0tqP4+v dDfyikSSCatEOuKB//PS8L4sy6+ijCSZrj5cqDxoJ7kxuA0/sBFeN741bW0slQvw+1Wf3+ooLYW1y qr4quly/0bRP8/NYGBV5/2p4kR3jVOyWJxgNTyKxvjZK/FeY2lRs93Y0OM58F1QoGJwV/mhaay1eh HrHdvqJegXe0krBO/xwuqhPox+abwr7Czp863ILjN5RRHEKgWRuMDUmhl9mDnuY8TNVpPXcxsidTW 05WVf6COxElwMYLW34hOzWOfInJwZedzgRn7zm83a336GvJ7BtG+9byWqMKsYGDgCP/PPHAG2VbNQ UoXvgOGw==; Received: from willy by casper.infradead.org with local (Exim 4.98.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1vqI9y-0000000DF6Q-0X5i; Wed, 11 Feb 2026 21:54:10 +0000 Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2026 21:54:09 +0000 From: Matthew Wilcox To: Dave Hansen Cc: "Vishal Moola (Oracle)" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, x86@kernel.org, "Mike Rapoport (Microsoft)" , akpm@linux-foundation.org, Dave Hansen , Andy Lutomirski , Peter Zijlstra Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 1/4] mm: Add address apis for ptdescs Message-ID: References: <20260211195233.368497-1-vishal.moola@gmail.com> <20260211195233.368497-2-vishal.moola@gmail.com> <0ead4a2d-c88c-4c89-b1dd-5954c28edb99@intel.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <0ead4a2d-c88c-4c89-b1dd-5954c28edb99@intel.com> On Wed, Feb 11, 2026 at 12:13:10PM -0800, Dave Hansen wrote: > On 2/11/26 11:52, Vishal Moola (Oracle) wrote: > > +/** > > + * pgtable_alloc_addr - Allocate pagetables to get an address > > + * @gfp: GFP flags > > + * @order: desired pagetable order > > FWIW, I don't like how pgtable_alloc_addr() looks in practice. It reads > like it is: "allocate a page table address", not "allocate a page > table". I don't have a better suggestion other than having: > > pgtable_alloc() > > that returns a page table pointer, a void*, and: > > ptdesc_alloc() > > which returns a ptdesc*. But I suspect that would get confusing at the > point that ptdescs _themselves_ start getting allocated. I think that's fine and consistent with folio_alloc(). Internally to ptdesc_alloc(), it'll use a kmem_cache_alloc(), so there won't be any confusion.