Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Thu, 7 Jul 2022 17:53:38 -0700
From:   Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@kernel.org>
To:     Song Liu <songliubraving@fb.com>
Cc:     Song Liu <song@kernel.org>, bpf <bpf@vger.kernel.org>,
        lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux-MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
        Kernel Team <Kernel-team@fb.com>,
        "x86@kernel.org" <x86@kernel.org>,
        "dave.hansen@linux.intel.com" <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
        "rick.p.edgecombe@intel.com" <rick.p.edgecombe@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 bpf-next 0/5] bpf_prog_pack followup
Message-ID: <YseAEsjE49AZDp8c@bombadil.infradead.org>
References: <20220707223546.4124919-1-song@kernel.org>
 <YsdlXjpRrlE9Z+Jq@bombadil.infradead.org>
 <F000FF60-CF95-4E6B-85BD-45FC668AAE0A@fb.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <F000FF60-CF95-4E6B-85BD-45FC668AAE0A@fb.com>
Sender: Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@infradead.org>
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Jul 07, 2022 at 11:52:58PM +0000, Song Liu wrote:
> > On Jul 7, 2022, at 3:59 PM, Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@kernel.org> wrote:
> > 
> > On Thu, Jul 07, 2022 at 03:35:41PM -0700, Song Liu wrote:
> >> This set is the second half of v4 [1].
> >> 
> >> Changes v5 => v6:
> >> 1. Rebase and extend CC list.
> > 
> > Why post a new iteration so soon without completing the discussion we
> > had? It seems like we were at least going somewhere. If it's just
> > to include mm as I requested, sure, that's fine, but this does not
> > provide context as to what we last were talking about.
> 
> Sorry for sending v6 too soon. The primary reason was to extend the CC
> list and add it back to patchwork (v5 somehow got archived). 
> 
> Also, I think vmalloc_exec_ work would be a separate project, while this 
> set is the followup work of bpf_prog_pack. Does this make sense? 
> 
> Btw, vmalloc_exec_ work could be a good topic for LPC. It will be much
> more efficient to discuss this in person. 

What we need is input from mm / arch folks. What is not done here is
what that stuff we're talking about is and so mm folks can't guess. My
preference is to address that.

I don't think in person discussion is needed if the only folks
discussing this topic so far is just you and me.

  Luis