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 v2 1/7] mm: Add process_vm_mmap() syscall declaration
To:     Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@intel.com>
Cc:     akpm@linux-foundation.org, dan.j.williams@intel.com,
        mhocko@suse.com, keith.busch@intel.com,
        kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com, alexander.h.duyck@linux.intel.com,
        andreyknvl@google.com, arunks@codeaurora.org, vbabka@suse.cz,
        cl@linux.com, riel@surriel.com, keescook@chromium.org,
        hannes@cmpxchg.org, npiggin@gmail.com,
        mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com, shakeelb@google.com, guro@fb.com,
        aarcange@redhat.com, hughd@google.com, jglisse@redhat.com,
        mgorman@techsingularity.net, daniel.m.jordan@oracle.com,
        jannh@google.com, kilobyte@angband.pl, linux-api@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org
References: <155836064844.2441.10911127801797083064.stgit@localhost.localdomain>
 <155836080726.2441.11153759042802992469.stgit@localhost.localdomain>
 <20190521002827.GA30518@iweiny-DESK2.sc.intel.com>
From:   Kirill Tkhai <ktkhai@virtuozzo.com>
Message-ID: <4c35e953-5f59-0202-3f75-f9ccf7df798f@virtuozzo.com>
Date:   Tue, 21 May 2019 11:29:09 +0300
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/60.6.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20190521002827.GA30518@iweiny-DESK2.sc.intel.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

Hi, Ira,

On 21.05.2019 03:28, Ira Weiny wrote:
> On Mon, May 20, 2019 at 05:00:07PM +0300, Kirill Tkhai wrote:
>> Similar to process_vm_readv() and process_vm_writev(),
>> add declarations of a new syscall, which will allow
>> to map memory from or to another process.
> 
> Shouldn't this be the last patch in the series so that the syscall is actually
> implemented first?

It looks like there is no dependencies in the last patch to declarations made
in the first patch, so we really can move it.

I'll make this after there are accumulated some commentaries about the logic
to reduce number of patch series.

[...]

Thanks,
Kirill