[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <c90376b4-0a8b-4db9-8b84-39325b1ac57e@redhat.com>
Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2025 22:39:30 +0100
From: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
To: Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@...hat.com>
Cc: kvm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, peterx@...hat.com,
mitchell.augustin@...onical.com, clg@...hat.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/5] mm: Provide page mask in struct follow_pfnmap_args
On 14.02.25 18:17, Alex Williamson wrote:
>
> Nudge. Peter Xu provided an R-b for the series. Would any other mm
> folks like to chime in here to provide objection or approval for this
> change and merging it through the vfio tree? Series[1]. Thanks!
>
Only skimmed over it, nothing jumped at me except ...
Nitpicking:
I was wondering if "page mask" really the right term here. I know that
we use it in some context (gup, hugetlb, zeropage) to express "mask this
off and you get the start of the aligned huge page".
For something that walks PFNMAPs (page frames without any real "huge
page" logical metadata etc. grouping) it was uintuitive for me at first.
addr_mask or pfn_mask (shifted addr_mask) would have been clearer for me.
No strong opinion, just what came to mind while reading this ...
--
Cheers,
David / dhildenb
Powered by blists - more mailing lists