linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PULL] Kmap conversions for 5.12

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20210226170248.GH3014244@iweiny-DESK2.sc.intel.com>
Date:   Fri, 26 Feb 2021 09:02:48 -0800
From:   Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@...el.com>
To:     dsterba@...e.cz, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        David Sterba <dsterba@...e.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux-MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] Kmap conversions for 5.12

On Fri, Feb 26, 2021 at 03:23:40PM +0100, David Sterba wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 25, 2021 at 08:32:34AM -0800, Ira Weiny wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 25, 2021 at 02:12:52PM +0100, David Sterba wrote:
> > > On Wed, Feb 24, 2021 at 09:59:12AM -0800, Ira Weiny wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Feb 24, 2021 at 01:30:49PM +0100, David Sterba wrote:
> > > > > On Tue, Feb 23, 2021 at 11:25:06AM -0800, Ira Weiny wrote:
> > > > > > On Tue, Feb 23, 2021 at 09:13:42AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > > > > > > On Tue, Feb 23, 2021 at 7:03 AM David Sterba <dsterba@...e.com> wrote:
> > > > > [...]
> > > > > 
> > > > > > Sorry.  I will change it.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Let me know how you want to proceed with the patchset/pull request.
> > > > 
> > > > To be clear I'd like to just drop the 2 patches which use zero_user() for this
> > > > merge window.
> > > > 
> > > > I've already submitted some additional btrfs changes for 5.13[1].  I can rework
> > > > these zero_user() patches and submit them through Andrew for 5.13 as separate
> > > > set.  That is what I meant by 'I will change it'.
> > > > 
> > > > > I
> > > > > can play the messenger again but now it seems a round of review is
> > > > > needed and with some testing it'll be possible in some -rc. At that
> > > > > point you may take the patches via the mm tree, unless Linus is ok with
> > > > > a late pull.
> > > > 
> > > > I'm ok with delaying the memzero_page() change to 5.13.  There are a lot of
> > > > kmap changes to come.  But I'm trying to do them as smaller series just for
> > > > this reason.  I don't want valid changes to be denied due to my messing up just
> > > > a few patches...  :-(  Hopefully you and Linus can forgive me on this one.
> > > > 
> > > > Is ok to just drop them and merge the rest of this series in 5.12?
> > > 
> > > Ok, no problem. Please let me know exactly which patches to drop, I'll
> > > respin the branch. Thanks.
> > 
> > Drop These 2:
> > 
> > [PATCH V2 5/8] iov_iter: Remove memzero_page() in favor of zero_user()
> > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20210210062221.3023586-6-ira.weiny@intel.com/
> > 
> > [PATCH V2 8/8] btrfs: convert to zero_user()
> > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20210210062221.3023586-9-ira.weiny@intel.com/
> > 
> > 
> > Keep:
> > 
> > [PATCH V2 1/8] mm/highmem: Lift memcpy_[to|from]_page to core 
> > [PATCH V2 2/8] mm/highmem: Convert memcpy_[to|from]_page() to kmap_local_page()
> > [PATCH V2 3/8] mm/highmem: Introduce memcpy_page(), memmove_page(), and memset_page()
> > [PATCH V2 4/8] mm/highmem: Add VM_BUG_ON() to mem*_page() calls
> > 	...
> > [PATCH V2 6/8] btrfs: use memcpy_[to|from]_page() and kmap_local_page()
> > [PATCH V2 7/8] btrfs: use copy_highpage() instead of 2 kmaps()
> > 	...
> > 
> > I would resend but I'd rather keep the exact commits you had in your testing
> > rather than potentially messing up the rebase this late.
> 
> Got it, thanks. It's easier for me to delete the patches once I have
> them in the branch, that's been updated and now pushed to kernel org
> again (https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/kdave/linux.git/log/?h=kmap-conversion-for-5.12)

Looks good.  thank you.

> 
> I'll add it to testing branches and let it test over the weekend,
> sending the pull request next week.
> 

Sounds like a good plan.

Once again thank you for dealing with this.

Sorry for the mix up,
Ira