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 B5095C433F5 for ; Wed, 11 May 2022 04:21:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id D18286B0075; Wed, 11 May 2022 00:21:11 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id CA0436B0078; Wed, 11 May 2022 00:21:11 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id B19456B007B; Wed, 11 May 2022 00:21:11 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from relay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0011.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.11]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9D5BD6B0075 for ; Wed, 11 May 2022 00:21:11 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin30.hostedemail.com (a10.router.float.18 [10.200.18.1]) by unirelay13.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 71F3061CA7 for ; Wed, 11 May 2022 04:21:11 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 79452162342.30.B537F8D Received: from mail-pg1-f181.google.com (mail-pg1-f181.google.com [209.85.215.181]) by imf03.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D474820098 for ; Wed, 11 May 2022 04:21:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-pg1-f181.google.com with SMTP id 137so741020pgb.5 for ; Tue, 10 May 2022 21:21:08 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=intel-com.20210112.gappssmtp.com; s=20210112; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=jl1GZmm7QuKAbToF+dPGx7IgxaH6ShvhQAX01HB3wCc=; b=ltUc6hKbTACE4zlFPJKf6Z+hO3WQcTTeuwKVHECbtUXdc3XEatIzd0n7tiO638vGBN d/gZVhxS756AE2mPE3v7qYCixusH6wSltbX2Thocw8XnHb21P3uuEQBLfUeJnIrOH4Eb u58jlZJltai+LVOH5tktxfMFkiDVx3LdYDF539tWHb2I/zqOJOpnW3wOvkCZGgcpn+Sw MGS3qyclt4YGl06g+pdoTt82yqLPYimOr49UnkrgN4o98xHzmXwhJL/1vydGGNGYpLjh eh/n2GFpyXsYuS+ZkiPitXl6gdr0JSVEkfwkCEd0sbz377Yo6JrzXqqW4AOxftLzp6Tm I2GA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=jl1GZmm7QuKAbToF+dPGx7IgxaH6ShvhQAX01HB3wCc=; b=oZX/rxq3Zq4FrS0VKlsfBetez6czEyDsyYvUoemGDdoBQhy3L3QvyWOb/czhpSMAc3 t+0VXwBqNmp01rtpmkrBBRZ8Kgu/9kyhpfMhJ8FXcFaTQ5xalLQokT7FPp0pBXeFj6Ra vY6D/BmQTlk92K4t5tE1fl06/SYlonwoIi7p11o1YY4MKcOLz+FsYZGZWVCTrArJHgqX n5ZXs6WTpLaqauggObyGZJYkjUBmf7pEOFTcJkAMpnnCiSC9WVp1xtNE4QoAuhh1mlNV WSy1x5myyh0HCoCGqutFR2wqpGM0cDylpxMPzwPUCpsnb05kwwrIX7mT2KzyZHCsuYzs piIA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530/OBwidY9csF/sKByXfnTBNTLWfWKoCawEhK6RgufEYHTQP4aI oyvEhME4YkTBBEEPyR6Cu7OMj4q2N9UBpbteTxGEPw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJw956CGNInPJoX0Sue0mYEmFyYdP4GE5ILyG00rRUkMD+8mKrIiV5I/p/QBznNriBkyTAqhRy7FXF8Omnk+4mA= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6a00:22d4:b0:510:6d75:e3da with SMTP id f20-20020a056a0022d400b005106d75e3damr23699430pfj.3.1652242868060; Tue, 10 May 2022 21:21:08 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20220508143620.1775214-1-ruansy.fnst@fujitsu.com> <20220511000352.GY27195@magnolia> <20220511014818.GE1098723@dread.disaster.area> <20220510192853.410ea7587f04694038cd01de@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: <20220510192853.410ea7587f04694038cd01de@linux-foundation.org> From: Dan Williams Date: Tue, 10 May 2022 21:20:57 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCHSETS] v14 fsdax-rmap + v11 fsdax-reflink To: Andrew Morton Cc: Dave Chinner , "Darrick J. Wong" , 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 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Stat-Signature: g7b5j41dfc4rnyjw7t3ksde4u3kcg1si X-Rspamd-Server: rspam12 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: D474820098 Authentication-Results: imf03.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=intel-com.20210112.gappssmtp.com header.s=20210112 header.b=ltUc6hKb; spf=none (imf03.hostedemail.com: domain of dan.j.williams@intel.com has no SPF policy when checking 209.85.215.181) smtp.mailfrom=dan.j.williams@intel.com; dmarc=fail reason="No valid SPF, DKIM not aligned (relaxed)" header.from=intel.com (policy=none) X-Rspam-User: X-HE-Tag: 1652242862-45663 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 7:29 PM 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 ? Latest is here: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20220508143620.1775214-1-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. Hmm, if it's straining things and XFS will also target v5.20 I think the best course for all involved is just wait. Let some of the current conflicts in -mm land in v5.19 and then I can merge the DAX baseline and publish a stable branch for XFS and BTRFS to build upon for v5.20. > 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?