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 kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C811AC433F5 for ; Wed, 11 May 2022 02:43:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 3BC126B0073; Tue, 10 May 2022 22:43:04 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 36B1C6B0075; Tue, 10 May 2022 22:43:04 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 20BBA6B0078; Tue, 10 May 2022 22:43:04 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from relay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0012.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.12]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 10F516B0073 for ; Tue, 10 May 2022 22:43:04 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin17.hostedemail.com (a10.router.float.18 [10.200.18.1]) by unirelay07.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CABF121E66 for ; Wed, 11 May 2022 02:43:03 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 79451915046.17.370986F Received: from dfw.source.kernel.org (dfw.source.kernel.org [139.178.84.217]) by imf15.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3658BA0092 for ; Wed, 11 May 2022 02:42:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.kernel.org (relay.kernel.org [52.25.139.140]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by dfw.source.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3D61E61743; Wed, 11 May 2022 02:43:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 90AECC385CB; Wed, 11 May 2022 02:43:01 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1652236981; bh=H+slBZhjJ5EG7moKEOfvPRRGLjpkOTwOOM/Iqo+g4oY=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=FxyrotPwafWFnECQ6+E1BpXm+/56DaFyJ/XOvXN884cx5Km0J/vV+razdDlMXFYGE JxWHkLwz2P5tCkPvHzepdp/zjD3UYVmnoVeOBblQAJlz5BXr4ZxiYMXzqJpZWC/I5E i9BaywZ949nDVoG6E2cmfJXLikmAOkTU9g+QdqYiLdD42X9dzXIM1n8cP9Ik17gMKE Z/hkeyECRJhqGjdEcze11T7rsAQiF4miwr6XESuE1Rix93PDZ6w921TM9hLtdrRHd6 V72lXep5kkgc9R4tGJAvA366FPEe3zzjoeWflOeQ5ngwG3LVbgVWKqV4roBtcsTaz2 WRv7inNKqcdfg== Date: Tue, 10 May 2022 19:43:01 -0700 From: "Darrick J. Wong" To: Andrew Morton Cc: Dan Williams , Dave Chinner , Shiyang Ruan , Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-xfs , Linux NVDIMM , Linux MM , linux-fsdevel , Christoph Hellwig , Jane Chu , Goldwyn Rodrigues , Al Viro , Matthew Wilcox , Naoya Horiguchi , linmiaohe@huawei.com Subject: Re: [PATCHSETS] v14 fsdax-rmap + v11 fsdax-reflink Message-ID: <20220511024301.GD27195@magnolia> References: <20220508143620.1775214-1-ruansy.fnst@fujitsu.com> <20220511000352.GY27195@magnolia> <20220511014818.GE1098723@dread.disaster.area> <20220510192853.410ea7587f04694038cd01de@linux-foundation.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20220510192853.410ea7587f04694038cd01de@linux-foundation.org> X-Rspam-User: X-Rspamd-Server: rspam11 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 3658BA0092 X-Stat-Signature: 4hyqeoykcwhycucdipqad3gpc5wxe3ib Authentication-Results: imf15.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=kernel.org header.s=k20201202 header.b=FxyrotPw; spf=pass (imf15.hostedemail.com: domain of djwong@kernel.org designates 139.178.84.217 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=djwong@kernel.org; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=kernel.org X-HE-Tag: 1652236971-212385 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 Tue, May 10, 2022 at 07:28:53PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Tue, 10 May 2022 18:55:50 -0700 Dan Williams wrote: > > > > It'll need to be a stable branch somewhere, but I don't think it > > > really matters where al long as it's merged into the xfs for-next > > > tree so it gets filesystem test coverage... > > > > So how about let the notify_failure() bits go through -mm this cycle, > > if Andrew will have it, and then the reflnk work has a clean v5.19-rc1 > > baseline to build from? > > What are we referring to here? I think a minimal thing would be the > memremap.h and memory-failure.c changes from > https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20220508143620.1775214-4-ruansy.fnst@fujitsu.com ? > > Sure, I can scoot that into 5.19-rc1 if you think that's best. It > would probably be straining things to slip it into 5.19. > > The use of EOPNOTSUPP is a bit suspect, btw. It *sounds* like the > right thing, but it's a networking errno. I suppose livable with if it > never escapes the kernel, but if it can get back to userspace then a > user would be justified in wondering how the heck a filesystem > operation generated a networking errno? most filesystems return EOPNOTSUPP rather enthusiastically when they don't know how to do something... --D