[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <aRxYQKrQeP8BzR_2@kernel.org>
Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2025 13:28:00 +0200
From: Mike Rapoport <rppt@...nel.org>
To: Pasha Tatashin <pasha.tatashin@...een.com>
Cc: pratyush@...nel.org, jasonmiu@...gle.com, graf@...zon.com,
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, rostedt@...dmis.org,
anna.schumaker@...cle.com, song@...nel.org, linux@...ssschuh.net,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
linux-mm@...ck.org, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, tglx@...utronix.de,
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, ptyadav@...zon.de, lennart@...ttering.net,
brauner@...nel.org, linux-api@...r.kernel.org,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, saeedm@...dia.com,
ajayachandra@...dia.com, jgg@...dia.com, parav@...dia.com,
leonro@...dia.com, witu@...dia.com, hughd@...gle.com,
skhawaja@...gle.com, chrisl@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 08/20] liveupdate: luo_flb: Introduce
File-Lifecycle-Bound global state
On Mon, Nov 17, 2025 at 10:54:29PM -0500, Pasha Tatashin wrote:
> >
> > The concept makes sense to me, but it's hard to review the implementation
> > without an actual user.
>
> There are three users: we will have HugeTLB support that is going to
> be posted as RFC in a few weeks. Also, in two weeks we are going to
> have an updated VFIO and IOMMU series posted both using FLBs. In the
> mean time, this series provides an FLB in-kernel test that verifies
> that multiple FLBs can be attached to File-Handlers, and the basic
> interfaces are working.
Which means that essentially there won't be a real kernel user for FLB for
a while.
We usually don't merge dead code because some future patchset depends on
it.
I think it should stay in mm-nonmm-unstable if Andrew does not mind keeping
it there until the first user is going to land and then FLB will move
upstream along with that user.
If keeping FLB in mm tree is an issue we can set up an integration tree for
LUO/KHO.
--
Sincerely yours,
Mike.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists