On Fri, Aug 9, 2024 at 12:12 AM Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Wed, 7 Aug 2024 22:13:03 +0100 Pedro Falcato <pedro.falcato@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > This series also depends on (and will eventually very slightly conflict with) > > the powerpc series that removes arch_unmap[2]. > > That's awkward. Please describe the dependency? One of the transformations done in this patch series (patch 2) assumes that arch_unmap either doesn't exist or does nothing. PPC is the only architecture with an arch_unmap implementation, and through the series I linked they're going to make it work via ->close(). What's the easiest way to deal with this? Can the PPC series go through the mm tree? I could also possibly work around this on my end, and either limit the terribleness to the ppc arch_unmap code or limit the effectiveness of the patch set a bit. But both of these options feel like somewhat fighting the inevitable. What do you think? Thanks, Pedro
