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 ECD8F2571A7 for ; Mon, 24 Feb 2025 12:13:32 +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=1740399214; cv=none; b=mZHrgJgUFcvIuzioLlzJ8h2aSZ3o55XHid2QaLe8z+Dy3dsUKG5Yp807ZhKPhLc+g+4P5Q/Ydlcop8MHWOZQrddsVZZwEwWGMR9Vkh0DH6WEgG90kj+Rd4DRVaqgMccYT/k7s7DGZVPBN5tKw8C5XqJbJcYqhtXL7Iy7KybEAwc= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1740399214; c=relaxed/simple; bh=vjC/h8Z3iv7wFZ/G0WFZniTbYH3M8TBQUzKGM802XrY=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=RoL+CV42+HOvMAt/sF3GghiNv8cUUifk8OuP2kHsNbuo1BRkQWCURZQVYQ12mvIqVBa9kKTxVFKOEHJVvjEgkGqKTyihX+Yr+wJl3mvvAhKTMIiltgvNxhoJ9sQnTVxEuohB5ZXV0HdZQgN0s5CVvbYu4yAgHmIbDv+BYgPhUGg= 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 EF6111756; Mon, 24 Feb 2025 04:13:48 -0800 (PST) Received: from [10.1.27.150] (XHFQ2J9959.cambridge.arm.com [10.1.27.150]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 391C13F6A8; Mon, 24 Feb 2025 04:13:27 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2025 12:13:25 +0000 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 v2 0/4] Fixes for hugetlb and vmalloc on arm64 Content-Language: en-GB To: Will Deacon , Catalin Marinas Cc: Huacai Chen , WANG Xuerui , Thomas Bogendoerfer , "James E.J. Bottomley" , Helge Deller , Madhavan Srinivasan , Michael Ellerman , Nicholas Piggin , Christophe Leroy , Naveen N Rao , Paul Walmsley , Palmer Dabbelt , Albert Ou , Heiko Carstens , Vasily Gorbik , Alexander Gordeev , Christian Borntraeger , Sven Schnelle , Gerald Schaefer , "David S. Miller" , Andreas Larsson , Arnd Bergmann , Muchun Song , Andrew Morton , Uladzislau Rezki , Christoph Hellwig , David Hildenbrand , "Matthew Wilcox (Oracle)" , Mark Rutland , Anshuman Khandual , Dev Jain , Kevin Brodsky , Alexandre Ghiti , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <20250217140419.1702389-1-ryan.roberts@arm.com> <20250221153501.GD20567@willie-the-truck> From: Ryan Roberts In-Reply-To: <20250221153501.GD20567@willie-the-truck> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 21/02/2025 15:35, Will Deacon wrote: > On Wed, Feb 19, 2025 at 07:10:32PM +0000, Catalin Marinas wrote: >> Will, Ryan, >> >> On Mon, Feb 17, 2025 at 02:04:13PM +0000, Ryan Roberts wrote: >>> This series contains some fixes for hugetlb on arm64, and is split out from v1 >>> of a wider series at [1]. While the last patch is technically targetting core-mm >>> and is not directly related to arm64, I'd like to to go via the arm64 tree so >>> that the wider performance improvement series (v2 to be posted shortly) that >>> depends on this series doesn't have to be robust to the fix not being present. >>> >>> I've included maintainers/reviewers for all the arches that are (trivially) >>> touched due to the API changes, hoping for some ACKs. >> >> These fixes look fine to me and I think we should get them in for 6.14. >> I think Andrew was ok with them going in via the arm64 tree: >> >> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-kernel/20250205235219.3c3a4b968087d1386d708b04@linux-foundation.org/ > > I think the diffstat looks worse than it really is, as the arch changes > are reasonably mechanical. I'd like to let it sit in next for a few days > though, so I'll pick this up once we've resolved my comment on patch #2. Sounds good to me; if you're happy with my proposal in the patch 2 thread, then I'll respin. > > Ryan -- did you find all of these issues by inspection, or are you aware > of anybody hitting them in practice? All by inspection. So I guess they are not urgent to fix from that perspective. > > Will