Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: Add new vma flag VM_LOCAL_CPU
To:     Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>,
        Boaz Harrosh <boazh@netapp.com>
References: <20180514191551.GA27939@bombadil.infradead.org>
 <7ec6fa37-8529-183d-d467-df3642bcbfd2@netapp.com>
 <20180515004137.GA5168@bombadil.infradead.org>
 <f3a66d8b-b9dc-b110-08aa-a63f0c309fb2@netapp.com>
 <20180515111159.GA31599@bombadil.infradead.org>
 <6999e635-e804-99d0-12fc-c13ff3e9ca58@netapp.com>
 <20180515120355.GE31599@bombadil.infradead.org>
 <afe2c02f-3ecd-5f54-53ab-d45c11a5b4aa@netapp.com>
 <20180515135056.GG31599@bombadil.infradead.org>
 <da89bf77-fcb5-1c0c-f5ce-66e552d9a54d@netapp.com>
 <20180515141839.GI31599@bombadil.infradead.org>
CC:     Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@redhat.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-mm@kvack.org" <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>, <x86@kernel.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
        Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>, Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>,
        Matthew Wilcox <mawilcox@microsoft.com>,
        Amit Golander <Amit.Golander@netapp.com>
From:   Boaz Harrosh <boazh@netapp.com>
Message-ID: <c07e1d43-598e-ac20-316d-64f6b6a0a4c7@netapp.com>
Date:   Tue, 15 May 2018 17:30:43 +0300
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/45.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20180515141839.GI31599@bombadil.infradead.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received-SPF: None (protection.outlook.com: netapp.com does not designate
 permitted sender hosts)
SpamDiagnosticOutput: 1:99
SpamDiagnosticMetadata: NSPM
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-OriginalArrivalTime: 15 May 2018 14:31:10.0677 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 2dffd3ef-fa85-4888-56e7-08d5ba70834a
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-FromEntityHeader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Id: 4b0911a0-929b-4715-944b-c03745165b3a
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: CY4PR06MB3080
X-OriginatorOrg: netapp.com
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On 15/05/18 17:18, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 05:10:57PM +0300, Boaz Harrosh wrote:
>> I'm not a lawyer either but I think I'm doing OK. Because I am doing exactly
>> like FUSE is doing. Only some 15 years later, with modern CPUs in mind. I do not
>> think I am doing anything new here, am I?
> 
> You should talk to a lawyer.  I'm not giving you legal advice.
> I'm telling you that I think what you're doing is unethical.
> .
> 

Not more unethical than what is already there. And I do not see how
this is unethical at all? I trust your opinion and would really want
to understand.

For example your not-in-c zero-copy Server. How is it unethical?
I have the same problem actually some important parts are not in C.

How is it unethical to want to make this run fast?

Thanks
Boaz