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 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7DBBAC3A59F for ; Fri, 16 Aug 2019 21:06:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 41F2F21721 for ; Fri, 16 Aug 2019 21:06:27 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="byMATH9E" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 41F2F21721 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux-foundation.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id CB7ED6B000E; Fri, 16 Aug 2019 17:06:26 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id C68AA6B0010; Fri, 16 Aug 2019 17:06:26 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id B7F386B0266; Fri, 16 Aug 2019 17:06:26 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from forelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0130.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.130]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 940296B000E for ; Fri, 16 Aug 2019 17:06:26 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin06.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by forelay03.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 36A298248AD7 for ; Fri, 16 Aug 2019 21:06:26 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 75829524372.06.hot86_55432f46bb40c X-HE-Tag: hot86_55432f46bb40c X-Filterd-Recvd-Size: 2676 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by imf37.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP for ; Fri, 16 Aug 2019 21:06:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost.localdomain (c-73-223-200-170.hsd1.ca.comcast.net [73.223.200.170]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 639F62133F; Fri, 16 Aug 2019 21:06:24 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1565989584; bh=CHOCkpoQQkDJgyYKnks0B20Xd0kj+K9F6iwN9Qysbcw=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=byMATH9E7U3uZhBNkjUuH7ji+mKtuC/eBtUARcnFSh1beVLZNlgA2k8RtYysflVLx GyCP/N3mTKDYKfG0MFuRJIlgvN0hQc6H/IWyeUCY5rwvz5FYqBysanA4OTSZ6K/fgi ZJM1MT6M4g0UUjWn3rqLkqdp75HzrqtHPPObUNcs= Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2019 14:06:23 -0700 From: Andrew Morton To: Christoph Hellwig Cc: Jason Gunthorpe , Christoph Hellwig , Linus Torvalds , Thomas =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Hellstr=F6m?= , Jerome Glisse , Steven Price , Linux-MM , Linux List Kernel Mailing , Minchan Kim Subject: Re: cleanup the walk_page_range interface Message-Id: <20190816140623.4e3a5f04ea1c08925ac4581f@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: <20190816123258.GA22140@lst.de> References: <20190808154240.9384-1-hch@lst.de> <20190816062751.GA16169@infradead.org> <20190816115735.GB5412@mellanox.com> <20190816123258.GA22140@lst.de> X-Mailer: Sylpheed 3.5.1 (GTK+ 2.24.31; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: On Fri, 16 Aug 2019 14:32:58 +0200 Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Fri, Aug 16, 2019 at 11:57:40AM +0000, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > > Are there conflicts with trees other than hmm? > > > > We can put it on a topic branch and merge to hmm to resolve. If hmm > > has problems then send the topic on its own? > > I see two new walk_page_range user in linux-next related to MADV_COLD > support (which probably really should use walk_range_vma), and then > there is the series from Steven, which hasn't been merged yet. Would it be practical to create a brand new interface with different functions names all in new source files? Once all callers are migrated over and tested, remove the old code?