On 04/03/2024 17:37, Catalin Marinas wrote: > On Mon, Mar 04, 2024 at 12:54:23PM +0000, Ryan Roberts wrote: >> On 01/03/2024 18:47, Catalin Marinas wrote: >>> On Mon, Feb 26, 2024 at 12:03:21PM +0000, Ryan Roberts wrote: >>>> Make clear the atmicity/consistency requirements of the API and how we >>>> achieve them. >>>> >>>> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/Zc-Tqqfksho3BHmU@xxxxxxx/ >>>> Signed-off-by: Ryan Roberts <ryan.roberts@xxxxxxx> >>>> --- >>>> arch/arm64/mm/contpte.c | 24 ++++++++++++++---------- >>>> 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-) > [...] >>> Throughout the callers of this function, I couldn't find one where it >>> matters. So I concluded that they don't need the dirty state. Normally >>> the dirty state is passed to the page flags, so not lost after the pte >>> has been cleaned. >> >> I agree we can simplify the semantics. But I think its better done in a separate >> series (which I previously linked). >> >> What's the bottom line here? Are you ok with this comment as a short term >> solution for now, or do you want something more radical (i.e. push to get the >> series that does these simplifications reviewed and in time for v6.9). >> >> I still believe the current ptep_get_lockless() implementation is correct. So >> given I have a plan to simplify in the long run, I hope we can still get this >> series into v6.9 as planned. > > Yes, I'm fine with this patch. Assuming Andrew picked them up: > > Reviewed-by: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@xxxxxxx> Thanks! Yes, he did - they are in mm-unstable. > > I'd like to get the simplification in as well at some point as I think > our ptep_get_lockless() is unnecessarily complex for most use-cases. Yes, I'll keep pushing it. I know DavidH is keen for it.
