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 D3AADECAAA1 for ; Tue, 6 Sep 2022 00:18:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 58D5A80236; Mon, 5 Sep 2022 20:18:57 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 563AC80224; Mon, 5 Sep 2022 20:18:57 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 42C9F80236; Mon, 5 Sep 2022 20:18:57 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from relay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0015.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.15]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 365A480224 for ; Mon, 5 Sep 2022 20:18:57 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin03.hostedemail.com (a10.router.float.18 [10.200.18.1]) by unirelay05.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0F79E407FB for ; Tue, 6 Sep 2022 00:18:57 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 79879750314.03.D7889EC Received: from mail-pj1-f48.google.com (mail-pj1-f48.google.com [209.85.216.48]) by imf12.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 98BEB40086 for ; Tue, 6 Sep 2022 00:18:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-pj1-f48.google.com with SMTP id q3so9622734pjg.3 for ; Mon, 05 Sep 2022 17:18:56 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel-dk.20210112.gappssmtp.com; s=20210112; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:from:references:cc:to :content-language:subject:user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id :from:to:cc:subject:date; bh=QfYqb6Pfw/hN4JPJ05FBEV50HBSGkGyPNi9iiQG7nRw=; b=ld4zch2mgovaLAdB8N98ih+6dYvI8qBpwLRLtjNUDXeImKkqFWB254xBhy80F0U90A J+yZQRYLuP0Jo0Mk4yML1TKUKTk4jEDPAOUEP0c5+yqaqhTQ7+gOhuufyatvIfqzg0BU d51A5BQHmMl/s8AQIKgv1IR+4ol+H/BXs6JEZtb4Swr9u9DXePXU/BvNKH7l3CIBjpu3 /8dasrmmcoD2uYWsFEenjdP0uA9ZA4SxjaxZhym5FeSGQJkADFqbpqEmWC82AjcP9iKc 1NfcpSGj9hkQFNFfw2zrIOCfADCzsT/D3pikpqUQo60TyPiILNt9xpxLMpKu3gGjb8Lt Rc5g== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:from:references:cc:to :content-language:subject:user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date; bh=QfYqb6Pfw/hN4JPJ05FBEV50HBSGkGyPNi9iiQG7nRw=; b=sh5FGZUbBKQ+bs4205ginaGleui7ov7f9ID8ZgXTnrKC9+TgHTehjt8WdEiuhe2dpq 2tbPgcP7qRIAU5unhZv9nhMhajhQ9g8bbBkil8RttD5DqVO3Zfpiq9Zp/1uIBXU2E9ls cU6lgsOoV7GKQu0CzGz75xKR3kJteBhV+12HrpEMK8PPF8ZaQzvwZ5rxeRDLjwjtzFak TkuUfeomCGHRuO0EkarPFGaCe6PUCH4v7Urz2p1vBVkBtMTYVdv2PIfxY9g/4bTHkCI3 gybPzCxWTQKiSoyJ+3VhraqJ3ub8tBBkim9NC/AI874t7sccl36WNw0RP1KaBNnN4aFI T+zg== X-Gm-Message-State: ACgBeo3F0j6G0M+UFMtZNLiU82PsvyUFJZVzS4cYnyRVDO73sZsK/fDi lSSS+j9ZKRkWmqWi1aXYPqHByg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AA6agR6jxIENBgUBR97NH/krn8jJvwlo5786QKZ2UpSO6xuS9EB3TrYsrTPQOCKgXQVdaJ7TxrILOA== X-Received: by 2002:a17:90a:7e87:b0:1fe:4d96:f6f6 with SMTP id j7-20020a17090a7e8700b001fe4d96f6f6mr21348991pjl.142.1662423535323; Mon, 05 Sep 2022 17:18:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.136] ([198.8.77.157]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 5-20020a170902c24500b0016dc78d0153sm219209plg.296.2022.09.05.17.18.54 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 05 Sep 2022 17:18:54 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <55a2d67f-9a12-9fe6-d73b-8c3f5eb36f31@kernel.dk> Date: Mon, 5 Sep 2022 18:18:53 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux aarch64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.1.2 Subject: Re: New topic branch for block + gup work? Content-Language: en-US To: John Hubbard , Andrew Morton , Logan Gunthorpe , Dan Williams , Christoph Hellwig , "Matthew Wilcox (Oracle)" Cc: LKML , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-block@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org References: <86266dcc-d475-7cd4-77dc-a8ba6f11620b@nvidia.com> From: Jens Axboe In-Reply-To: <86266dcc-d475-7cd4-77dc-a8ba6f11620b@nvidia.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hostedemail.com; s=arc-20220608; t=1662423536; h=from:from:sender:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references:dkim-signature; bh=QfYqb6Pfw/hN4JPJ05FBEV50HBSGkGyPNi9iiQG7nRw=; b=uq5nzfMGkkvXKBJGyOSz9gYoHPCbe63PZ/Kv//9Wd6mO9RJzVLhNnYRXbei5cOwPQaUafI c5CU7JsG7ulRgs5E/jptEt1DBu9RMKvUer1YNdg1sH1Zo0q1OTHz6x/L8LzxdMYxRQ6xCj QGulrzYF5mFC+FZ5FBE/PGz+PxyG38g= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; imf12.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=kernel-dk.20210112.gappssmtp.com header.s=20210112 header.b=ld4zch2m; spf=pass (imf12.hostedemail.com: domain of axboe@kernel.dk designates 209.85.216.48 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=axboe@kernel.dk; dmarc=none ARC-Seal: i=1; s=arc-20220608; d=hostedemail.com; t=1662423536; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=QT98y9R5dSYC8UkX+rCrxgDYGuiNbbAY44igW3cIn7QzG9eXNQT+4se2+J9ZVw3Xup8p3N DQYuV6vOyVCfFW4DE9TwZT5BQRYMQ3aYjCKnKH6zo5bktSR2XtvTleW41errF0VST2BDmx 5ZKPdS7qG9IDNl1WgfeIrTBvomVYOEM= X-Rspam-User: X-Stat-Signature: 8gihao8nwbuyh5w4kuetnn64cnzzrj7n X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 98BEB40086 Authentication-Results: imf12.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=kernel-dk.20210112.gappssmtp.com header.s=20210112 header.b=ld4zch2m; spf=pass (imf12.hostedemail.com: domain of axboe@kernel.dk designates 209.85.216.48 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=axboe@kernel.dk; dmarc=none X-Rspamd-Server: rspam04 X-HE-Tag: 1662423536-246038 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 9/5/22 5:16 PM, John Hubbard wrote: > Hi Jens, > > After you suggested a topic branch [1] as a way to address the recent > bio_map_user_iov() conflict in linux-next, I've reviewed a few more > patchsets in mm, and am now starting to suspect that a topic branch > would be ideal here. > > Logan's "Userspace P2PDMA with O_DIRECT NVMe devices" series [2], my > "convert most filesystems to pin_user_pages_fast()" series [3], and the > block layer change from [1], all conflict in iov_iter*, and in > bio_map_user_iov(). > > Less of an issue but still worth considering, Dan's "Fix the DAX-gup > mistake" series [4] conflicts in gup.c, too. > > Maybe: > > gup_bio > > , or something like that, as a topic branch? > > Everyone: thoughts, preferences here? My suggestion would be to branch from for-6.1/block, then we can apply the gup patches on top of that. I'd probably just call it for-6.1/block-gup. -- Jens Axboe