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:   Wed, 19 Oct 2022 08:25:42 +0800
From:   Baoquan He <bhe@redhat.com>
To:     Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu>
Cc:     "linux-mm@kvack.org" <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-arch@vger.kernel.org" <linux-arch@vger.kernel.org>,
        "akpm@linux-foundation.org" <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        "hch@infradead.org" <hch@infradead.org>,
        "agordeev@linux.ibm.com" <agordeev@linux.ibm.com>,
        "wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com" <wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com>,
        "schnelle@linux.ibm.com" <schnelle@linux.ibm.com>,
        "David.Laight@aculab.com" <David.Laight@aculab.com>,
        "shorne@gmail.com" <shorne@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/8] mm: ioremap: Convert architectures to take
 GENERIC_IOREMAP way (Alternative)
Message-ID: <Y09EBgoqPGy2A5WL@MiWiFi-R3L-srv>
References: <cover.1665568707.git.christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu>
 <Y0yj0IDBVOFwCFuv@MiWiFi-R3L-srv>
 <fd7aa861-a85a-cc6d-df62-6e5e9a1b3149@csgroup.eu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <fd7aa861-a85a-cc6d-df62-6e5e9a1b3149@csgroup.eu>
Precedence: bulk

On 10/17/22 at 05:06pm, Christophe Leroy wrote:
> Hi Baoquan,
> 
> Le 17/10/2022 ? 02:37, Baoquan He a ?crit?:
> > Hi Christophe,
> > 
> > On 10/12/22 at 12:09pm, Christophe Leroy wrote:
> >> From:
> >>
> >> As proposed in the discussion related to your series, here comes an
> >> exemple of how it could be.
> >>
> >> I have taken it into ARC and IA64 architectures as an exemple. This is
> >> untested, even not compiled, it is just to illustrated my meaning in the
> >> discussion.
> >>
> >> I also added a patch for powerpc architecture, that one in tested with
> >> both pmac32_defconfig and ppc64_le_defconfig.
> >>
> >>  From my point of view, this different approach provide less churn and
> >> less intellectual disturbance than the way you do it.
> > 
> > Yes, I agree, and admire your insistence on the thing you think right or
> > better. Learn from you.
> > 
> > When you suggested this in my v2 post, I made a draft patch at below link
> > according to your suggestion to request people to review. What worried
> > me is that I am not sure it's ignored or disliked after one week of
> > waiting.
> > 
> > https://lore.kernel.org/all/YwtND%2FL8xD+ViN3r@MiWiFi-R3L-srv/#related
> > 
> > Up to now, seems people don't oppose this generic_ioremap_prot() way, we
> > can take it. So what's your plan? You want me to continue with your
> > patches wrapped in, or I can leave it to you if you want to take over?
> 
> I don't plan to steal your work. If you feel confortable with my 
> proposal, feel free to continue with it and amplify it. You have done 
> most of the job, you have a clear view of all subtilities in the 
> different architectures, so please continue, I don't plan to take over 
> the good work you've done until now.
> 
> The only purpose of my series was to illustrate my comments and convince 
> myself it was a possible way, nothing more.

Thanks a lot for all these you have done, I will post another version with
the introducing generic_ioremap_prot() way you suggesed.