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, 5 Jul 2023 17:44:40 -0700
From:   Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To:     Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com>
Cc:     Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com>, David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>,
        jirislaby@kernel.org, jacobly.alt@gmail.com,
        holger@applied-asynchrony.com, hdegoede@redhat.com,
        michel@lespinasse.org, jglisse@google.com, mhocko@suse.com,
        vbabka@suse.cz, hannes@cmpxchg.org, mgorman@techsingularity.net,
        dave@stgolabs.net, willy@infradead.org, liam.howlett@oracle.com,
        peterz@infradead.org, ldufour@linux.ibm.com, paulmck@kernel.org,
        mingo@redhat.com, will@kernel.org, luto@kernel.org,
        songliubraving@fb.com, dhowells@redhat.com, hughd@google.com,
        bigeasy@linutronix.de, kent.overstreet@linux.dev,
        punit.agrawal@bytedance.com, lstoakes@gmail.com,
        peterjung1337@gmail.com, rientjes@google.com, chriscli@google.com,
        axelrasmussen@google.com, joelaf@google.com, minchan@google.com,
        rppt@kernel.org, jannh@google.com, shakeelb@google.com,
        tatashin@google.com, edumazet@google.com, gthelen@google.com,
        linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        stable@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] mm: disable CONFIG_PER_VMA_LOCK until its fixed
Message-Id: <20230705174440.9adb53f2e362056867135b84@linux-foundation.org>
In-Reply-To: <CAJuCfpGWW7wsrtqi4rZUz4vxW-N0CaUEeUqY4e7iX1hzgRsT2g@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20230705171213.2843068-1-surenb@google.com>
        <20230705171213.2843068-3-surenb@google.com>
        <3cdaa7d4-1293-3806-05ce-6b7fc4382458@redhat.com>
        <CAJuCfpGTNF9BWBxZoqYKSDrtq=iJoN1n8oTc=Yu0pPzW8cs8rQ@mail.gmail.com>
        <ZKXRsQC8ufiebDGu@x1n>
        <CAJuCfpGHRfK1ZC3YmF1caKHiR7hD73goOXLKQubFLuOgzCr0dg@mail.gmail.com>
        <20230705172424.e505f5013bfdf44543d9c6be@linux-foundation.org>
        <CAJuCfpFLRePeOsrSg--5GtWbC1M5y21Sq7gzrs1vVEUE7C+30A@mail.gmail.com>
        <CAJuCfpGWW7wsrtqi4rZUz4vxW-N0CaUEeUqY4e7iX1hzgRsT2g@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, 5 Jul 2023 17:32:09 -0700 Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com> wrote:

> On Wed, Jul 5, 2023 at 5:30 PM Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Jul 5, 2023 at 5:24 PM Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Wed, 5 Jul 2023 13:33:26 -0700 Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > I was hoping we could re-enable VMA locks in 6.4 once we get more
> > > > confirmations that the problem is gone. Is that not possible once the
> > > > BROKEN dependency is merged?
> > >
> > > I think "no".  By doing this we're effectively backporting a minor
> > > performance optimization, which isn't a thing we'd normally do.
> >
> > In that case, maybe for 6.4 we send the fix and only disable it by
> > default without marking BROKEN? That way we still have a way to enable
> > it if desired?
> 
> I'm preparing the next version with Liam's corrections. If the above
> option I suggested is acceptable I can send a modified second patch
> which would not have BROKEN dependency.

I think just mark it broken and move on.  At some later time we can
consider backporting the fixes into 6.4.x and reenabling, but I don't
think it's likely that we'll do this.