* Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@xxxxxxxxxx> [240213 13:57]: ... > > > > Yes, I don't think we should be locking the mm in lock_vma(), as it > > makes things hard to follow. > > > > We could use something like uffd_prepare(), uffd_complete() but I > > thought of those names rather late in the cycle, but I've already caused > > many iterations of this patch set and that clean up didn't seem as vital > > as simplicity and clarity of the locking code. > > Maybe lock_vma_for_uffd()/unlock_vma_for_uffd()? Whatever name is > better I'm fine with it but all these #ifdef's sprinkled around don't > contribute to the readability. The issue I have is the vma in the name - we're not doing anything to the vma when we mmap_lock. > Anyway, I don't see this as a blocker, just nice to have. Yes, that's how I see it as well.
