[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <mafs0ectod5eb.fsf@kernel.org>
Date: Wed, 06 Aug 2025 14:02:52 +0200
From: Pratyush Yadav <pratyush@...nel.org>
To: Pasha Tatashin <pasha.tatashin@...een.com>
Cc: Pratyush Yadav <pratyush@...nel.org>, Steven Rostedt
<rostedt@...dmis.org>, Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>, Thomas Gleixner
<tglx@...utronix.de>, jasonmiu@...gle.com, graf@...zon.com,
changyuanl@...gle.com, rppt@...nel.org, dmatlack@...gle.com,
rientjes@...gle.com, corbet@....net, rdunlap@...radead.org,
ilpo.jarvinen@...ux.intel.com, kanie@...ux.alibaba.com,
ojeda@...nel.org, aliceryhl@...gle.com, masahiroy@...nel.org,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, tj@...nel.org, yoann.congal@...le.fr,
mmaurer@...gle.com, roman.gushchin@...ux.dev, chenridong@...wei.com,
axboe@...nel.dk, mark.rutland@....com, jannh@...gle.com,
vincent.guittot@...aro.org, hannes@...xchg.org,
dan.j.williams@...el.com, david@...hat.com, joel.granados@...nel.org,
anna.schumaker@...cle.com, song@...nel.org, zhangguopeng@...inos.cn,
linux@...ssschuh.net, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, mingo@...hat.com, bp@...en8.de,
dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com, x86@...nel.org, hpa@...or.com,
rafael@...nel.org, dakr@...nel.org, bartosz.golaszewski@...aro.org,
cw00.choi@...sung.com, myungjoo.ham@...sung.com,
yesanishhere@...il.com, Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com,
quic_zijuhu@...cinc.com, aleksander.lobakin@...el.com,
ira.weiny@...el.com, andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com,
leon@...nel.org, lukas@...ner.de, bhelgaas@...gle.com,
wagi@...nel.org, djeffery@...hat.com, stuart.w.hayes@...il.com,
lennart@...ttering.net, brauner@...nel.org, linux-api@...r.kernel.org,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, saeedm@...dia.com,
ajayachandra@...dia.com, parav@...dia.com, leonro@...dia.com,
witu@...dia.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 31/32] libluo: introduce luoctl
Hi Pasha,
On Tue, Aug 05 2025, Pasha Tatashin wrote:
>> To add some context: one of the reasons to include it in the series as
>> an RFC at the end was to showcase the userspace side of the API and have
>> a way for people to see how it can be used. Seeing an API in action
>> provides useful context for reviewing patches.
>>
>> I think Pasha forgot to add the RFC tags when he created v2, since it is
>> only meant to be RFC right now and not proper patches.
>
> Correct, I accidently removed RFC from memfd patches in the version. I
> will include memfd preservation as RFCv1 in v3 submission.
I didn't mean this for the memfd patches, only for libluo.
I think the memfd patches are in decent shape. They aren't pristine, but
I do think they are good enough to land and be improved iteratively.
If you think otherwise, then what do you reckon needs to be done to make
them _not_ RFC?
--
Regards,
Pratyush Yadav
Powered by blists - more mailing lists