On Tue, Oct 3, 2023 at 11:26 PM Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 3, 2023 at 2:21 PM Peter Xu <peterx@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On Tue, Oct 03, 2023 at 11:08:07PM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote: > > > Sorry I have to ask: has this ever been discussed on the list? I don't see > > > any pointers. If not, then probably the number of people that know about the > > > history can be counted with my two hands and that shouldn't be the basis for > > > making decisions. > > > > For example: > > > > https://lore.kernel.org/all/1425575884-2574-21-git-send-email-aarcange@xxxxxxxxxx/ > > There was another submission in 2019: > https://lore.kernel.org/all/cover.1547251023.git.blake.caldwell@xxxxxxxxxxxx/ > > Though both times it did not generate much discussion. I don't have a > strong preference though MOVE sounds more generic to me TBH (it > specifies the operation rather than REMAP which hints on how that > operation is carried out). But again, I'm fine either way. That's a good point. IMHO, if in future we want to have the fallback implemented, then MOVE would be a more appropriate name than REMAP. > As for UFFDIO_MOVE_ZERO_COPY_ONLY vs UFFDIO_MOVE_MODE_ALLOW_COPY, I > find it weird that the default (the most efficient/desired) mode of > operation needs a flag. I would prefer to have no flag initially and > add UFFDIO_MOVE_MODE_ALLOW_COPY or whatever name is more appropriate > when/if we ever need it. Makes sense? Agreed! > > > > > -- > > Peter Xu > > > > -- > > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to kernel-team+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxx. > >
