On Fri, Dec 04, 2020 at 02:37:17PM -0500, Andrea Arcangeli wrote: > If we use _UFFD_SWP_UFFD_WP it looks much cleaner to keep it in the > pte, not in the swp entry, since then you can use the already existing > methods that only can take in input the pte_t (not the swp_entry_t). Ah, I see now. Yes it looks nicer if we don't even need swp_entry_t knowledge to recognize the special pte. So I'll try all these ideas and update. Thanks, -- Peter Xu
