Hi Lorenzo On Fri, Dec 13, 2024 at 1:18 AM Lorenzo Stoakes <lorenzo.stoakes@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Thu, Dec 12, 2024 at 10:50:19PM -0700, Yu Zhao wrote: > > On Wed, Dec 11, 2024 at 11:57 AM Lorenzo Stoakes > > <lorenzo.stoakes@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > On Wed, Dec 11, 2024 at 10:36:42AM -0800, Jeff Xu wrote: > > > > On Wed, Dec 11, 2024 at 2:53 AM Lorenzo Stoakes > > > > <lorenzo.stoakes@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Update the MEMORY MAPPING section to contain VMA logic as it makes no > > > > > sense to have these two sections separate. > > > > > > > > > > Additionally, add files which permit changes to the attributes and/or > > > > > ranges spanned by memory mappings, in essence anything which might alter > > > > > the output of /proc/$pid/[s]maps. > > > > > > > > > > This is necessarily fuzzy, as there is not quite as good separation of > > > > > concerns as we would ideally like in the kernel. However each of these > > > > > files interacts with the VMA and memory mapping logic in such a way as to > > > > > be inseparatable from it, and it is important that they are maintained in > > > > > conjunction with it. > > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Lorenzo Stoakes <lorenzo.stoakes@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > --- > > > > > MAINTAINERS | 23 ++++++++--------------- > > > > > 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-) > > > > > > > > > > diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS > > > > > index 68d825a4c69c..fb91389addd7 100644 > > > > > --- a/MAINTAINERS > > > > > +++ b/MAINTAINERS > > > > > @@ -15071,7 +15071,15 @@ L: linux-mm@xxxxxxxxx > > > > > S: Maintained > > > > > W: http://www.linux-mm.org > > > > > T: git git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/akpm/mm > > > > > +F: mm/mlock.c > > > > > F: mm/mmap.c > > > > > +F: mm/mprotect.c > > > > > +F: mm/mremap.c > > > > > +F: mm/mseal.c > > > > > +F: mm/vma.c > > > > > +F: mm/vma.h > > > > > +F: mm/vma_internal.h > > > > > +F: tools/testing/vma/ > > > > > > > > > Will madvise be here too ? > > > > > > No. We had a long discussion about this on another version of this patch :) > > > it's blurry lines but it, in the end, is too much related to things other > > > than VMA logic. > > > > > > We probably need better separation of stuff, but that's another thing... > > > > > > > I'd like to be added as a reviewer on mm/mseal.c. Is there any way to > > > > indicate this from this file ? > > > > > > This is something we can consider in the future, sure. > > > > What'd be the downsides of having an additional reviewer? Especially > > the one who wrote the code... > > > > > However at this time you have had really significant issues in engaging > > > with the community on a regular basis > > > > I'm not aware that this can disqualify anyone from being a reviewer of > > a specific file. > > > > > so I think the community is unlikely > > > to be open to this until you have improved in this area. > > > > I do not know Jeff personally, but I think the community should make > > anyone who wants to contribute feel welcome. > > This is very unfair. > > I have personally spent several hours doing my best to try to provide > advice and review strictly to help Jeff get series into the kernel, perhaps > more than anybody else. > Thanks for your help (and others ) on reviewing mseal_test.c. For the reference: I sent RFC [1] to follow up on refactor work of selftest. To save your review time, I made minimal changes using two test cases, and intended as a baseline/pattern for remaining refactoring work for mseal_test.c. If you have time to give your comments about the RFC before the holiday break, great! I can start refactoring the other mseal_test. Otherwise, the after-holiday will be fine too. [1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20241211053311.245636-1-jeffxu@xxxxxxxxxx/ Best regards, -Jeff
