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 1137FC02198 for ; Wed, 12 Feb 2025 16:43:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 906686B0082; Wed, 12 Feb 2025 11:43:37 -0500 (EST) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 8B5ED6B0083; Wed, 12 Feb 2025 11:43:37 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 7A4FD6B0085; Wed, 12 Feb 2025 11:43:37 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from relay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0014.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.14]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5CD856B0082 for ; Wed, 12 Feb 2025 11:43:37 -0500 (EST) Received: from smtpin13.hostedemail.com (a10.router.float.18 [10.200.18.1]) by unirelay09.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 179E68250B for ; Wed, 12 Feb 2025 16:43:37 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 83111863674.13.A416398 Received: from casper.infradead.org (casper.infradead.org [90.155.50.34]) by imf26.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DFE7914000A for ; Wed, 12 Feb 2025 16:43:34 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: imf26.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=infradead.org header.s=casper.20170209 header.b=mj7xp0qK; dmarc=none; spf=none (imf26.hostedemail.com: domain of willy@infradead.org has no SPF policy when checking 90.155.50.34) smtp.mailfrom=willy@infradead.org ARC-Seal: i=1; s=arc-20220608; d=hostedemail.com; t=1739378615; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=Wsy+h3PpCgNaml41aaL5o+taGFzCCRrmmc+W7cOr957AfuD6XQKGPThn90SaftCWCUcp/y CcV2LCJGKzQdLlzzRyWtS98MY4X9zZtfs3IsjY/Ttgc674DTidMjTu7Y/apOlJ8V0wd5d8 wDl/De3qwK+AuagOlYW5LE0Df1hUhE0= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; imf26.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=infradead.org header.s=casper.20170209 header.b=mj7xp0qK; dmarc=none; spf=none (imf26.hostedemail.com: domain of willy@infradead.org has no SPF policy when checking 90.155.50.34) smtp.mailfrom=willy@infradead.org ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hostedemail.com; s=arc-20220608; t=1739378615; 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: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references:dkim-signature; bh=1KPOfSAujqgY7sHzMJ8U8f87YPeDV8fuUhdlaQWQ9YE=; b=AfuBsupSKi5OEiT6R17x8R7LJ1zzOqS3jN4M5NfGm12mI9u6o1XyExFRuU6/jZpT40OqFI RE3fGdRS3pXHEyCtjoWqYVafvH4pzN2geYQZENO/02TmmNnyuEKseQcopZZBPtAzyLf5bx qrP60HXgsLT8VqUUvlAXZO9HTfNsUfI= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=infradead.org; s=casper.20170209; h=In-Reply-To:Content-Type:MIME-Version: References:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Sender:Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description; bh=1KPOfSAujqgY7sHzMJ8U8f87YPeDV8fuUhdlaQWQ9YE=; b=mj7xp0qKKHTp00vevwEhm0icSI EIzdEIbDBVLkVlns1VFwOqBw3gcbMpBTzvSL/g7IRIbu0NDS8Ej6geCtcyRUAyTkyQlx+Ckkdakvc 9WzWzzS9Au5Hr5C/sbGllT4OQq3MMTevIxHuEmGEFAVDKinOjETzr+5l/BPmddUcwMZWIE2+4fssY 0YtITjJCwDK9sY6vUsd9//EyKjOGDBj5ptK3wl8VqSOcOkmkz3h6zsm71Bw3+LZkeCM98iV5FTS8a CxX4bC9XpCiO5X1eLX/0wpR7jUOdcXIwBFNFzyPXTtOOao3DI1F5uJlZf30IILl7KkPNuRWGDJ4mv jALduaDw==; Received: from willy by casper.infradead.org with local (Exim 4.98 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1tiFpj-00000005Ny1-1Otz; Wed, 12 Feb 2025 16:43:31 +0000 Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2025 16:43:31 +0000 From: Matthew Wilcox To: Claudio Imbrenda Cc: Alexander Gordeev , Gerald Schaefer , Heiko Carstens , Vasily Gorbik , Christian Borntraeger , linux-mm@kvack.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] s390: Remove PageDirty check inside mk_pte() Message-ID: References: <20250116212338.653160-1-willy@infradead.org> <20250212140806.676d7bf3@p-imbrenda> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20250212140806.676d7bf3@p-imbrenda> X-Rspam-User: X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: DFE7914000A X-Rspamd-Server: rspam12 X-Stat-Signature: sqh451gwc3kupfpcgci1q8u4r68ws8e6 X-HE-Tag: 1739378614-31016 X-HE-Meta: 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 4R9xLo1l WBxUi/B4K57EB+j3v1XEDPOd/etis6BLAp5YhgsDZiEJ3cJRAQ/vAN3FR8KThgYnSZavamSX68HVj5+0n2p2yP7CcKMeJ7jaUztEzXG4laSjCzBQ1a/FUyWJmpDOxSAEdmQ81Rb38fjI2yxWpA6vPuOhQ30w1gErvvsGKvoFH1OgUTBOjJDxRa2JsKPzhlZ5aoK6vNZykkAxJu88AXppSZ1tZOX1LzoveGXyFemMicbeK8ufZF2npjgowMlY5NtrFgn5kHQx17Y1msZMyu84Kagw3LBdQij12fthesrbJzgKRQ5k= X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.022622, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: On Wed, Feb 12, 2025 at 02:08:06PM +0100, Claudio Imbrenda wrote: > On Wed, 12 Feb 2025 13:44:58 +0100 > Alexander Gordeev wrote: > > [...] > > > The above is however not exactly the same, since set_pte_range() -> set_ptes() > > dirtyfies all PTEs in a folio - unlike the current s390 implementation, which > > dirtyfies a single PTE based on its struct page flag. > > I have not looked enough into this specific matter to actually have an > opinion, but I just want to quickly point out that in the next couple > of years struct page as we know it will go away, and flags will only be > per-folio anyway. Most flags have been per-allocation rather than per-page for many years. Specifically, the dirty flag has been per-allocation since January 2016 in commit df8c94d13c7e