[Emergency posting to fix the tag and couldn't find unmangled Cc list, so some recipients were dropped, sorry. (I guess you are glad though).]
2014-09-16 14:01-0700, Andres Lagar-Cavilla: > On Tue, Sep 16, 2014 at 1:51 PM, Radim Krčmář <rkrc...@redhat.com> wrote: > > 2014-09-15 13:11-0700, Andres Lagar-Cavilla: > >> +int kvm_get_user_page_retry(struct task_struct *tsk, struct > >> mm_struct *mm, > > > > The suffix '_retry' is not best suited for this. > > On first reading, I imagined we will be retrying something from > > before, > > possibly calling it in a loop, but we are actually doing the first and > > last try in one call. > > We are doing ... the second and third in most scenarios. async_pf did > the first with _NOWAIT. We call this from the async pf retrier, or if > async pf couldn't be notified to the guest. I was thinking more about what the function does, not how we currently use it -- nothing prevents us from using it as first somewhere -- but yeah, even comments would be off then. > >> Apart from this, the patch looks good. The mm/ parts are minimal, so > >> I > >> think it's best to merge it through the KVM tree with someone's > >> Acked-by. > > > > I would prefer to have the last hunk in a separate patch, but still, > > > > Acked-by: Radim Krčmář <rkrc...@redhat.com> > > Awesome, thanks much. > > I'll recut with the VM_BUG_ON from Paolo and your Ack. LMK if anything > else from this email should go into the recut. Ah, sorry, I'm not maintaining mm ... what I meant was Reviewed-by: Radim Krčmář <rkrc...@redhat.com> and I had to leave before I could find a good apology for VM_WARN_ON_ONCE(), so if you are replacing BUG_ON, you might want to look at that one as well. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
