[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <8b528367-3636-d05b-84d3-754876ff1e6a@huawei.com>
Date: Wed, 2 Jun 2021 14:42:06 +0800
From: Kefeng Wang <wangkefeng.wang@...wei.com>
To: "Russell King (Oracle)" <linux@...linux.org.uk>
CC: <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Jungseung Lee <js07.lee@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] ARM: mm: Refactor __do_page_fault()
On 2021/6/1 22:31, Russell King (Oracle) wrote:
> On Sat, May 29, 2021 at 11:41:37AM +0800, Kefeng Wang wrote:
>> 1. cleanup access_error(), make vma flags set and check into
>> __do_page_fault() and do_page_fault() directly.
>>
>> 2. drop fsr and task argument, instead, using vm_flags in
>> __do_page_fault().
>>
>> 3. cleans up the multiple goto statements in __do_page_fault().
>>
>> 4. use current->mm directly in do_page_fault().
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Kefeng Wang <wangkefeng.wang@...wei.com>
> This patch is a really good example of something that is very difficult
> to review and see that there are no unintended changes.
>
> Many people have complained about my patches, where I create a series of
> many patches where each patch does exactly _one_ simple transformation to
> the code. This is a good example _why_ I do that - a step by step single
> transformation approach is way easier to review.
>
> Sorry, but I'm not able to sensibly review this patch, and therefore
> I won't apply it. Please split it into smaller changes.
Ok, will split it and send v2, thanks.
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists