Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Fri, 5 Feb 2021 14:21:47 -0800 (PST)
From:   Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>
To:     Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com>
cc:     linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
        Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@oracle.com>,
        Jerome Glisse <jglisse@redhat.com>,
        "Kirill A . Shutemov" <kirill@shutemov.name>,
        Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>,
        Axel Rasmussen <axelrasmussen@google.com>,
        Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>,
        Nadav Amit <nadav.amit@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 00/30] userfaultfd-wp: Support shmem and hugetlbfs
In-Reply-To: <20210129224938.GC260413@xz-x1>
Message-ID: <alpine.LSU.2.11.2102051411200.5769@eggly.anvils>
References: <20210115170907.24498-1-peterx@redhat.com> <20210129224938.GC260413@xz-x1>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.11 (LSU 23 2013-08-11)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, 29 Jan 2021, Peter Xu wrote:
> 
> Huge & Mike,
> 
> Would any of you have comment/concerns on the high-level design of this series?
> 
> It would be great to know it, especially major objection, before move on to an
> non-rfc version.

Seeing Mike's update prompts me to speak up: I have been looking, and
will continue to look through it - will report when done; but find I've
been making very little forward progress from one day to the next.

It is very confusing, inevitably; but you have done an *outstanding*
job on acknowledging the confusion, and commenting it in great detail.

Hugh