Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-66032-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:45e3:2400::1 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:45e3:2400::1;
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2024 14:17:14 -0800
From: "Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@kernel.org>
To: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
Cc: Chandan Babu R <chandan.babu@oracle.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org, Mateusz Guzik <mjguzik@gmail.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
	Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 0/3] Remove the XFS mrlock
Message-ID: <20240214221714.GB616564@frogsfrogsfrogs>
References: <20240111212424.3572189-1-willy@infradead.org>
 <Zc05FiqYKgtNHUL7@casper.infradead.org>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <Zc05FiqYKgtNHUL7@casper.infradead.org>

On Wed, Feb 14, 2024 at 10:05:10PM +0000, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 11, 2024 at 09:24:21PM +0000, Matthew Wilcox (Oracle) wrote:
> > XFS has an mrlock wrapper around the rwsem which adds only the
> > functionality of knowing whether the rwsem is currently held in read
> > or write mode.  Both regular rwsems and rt-rwsems know this, they just
> > don't expose it as an API.  By adding that, we can remove the XFS mrlock
> > as well as improving the debug assertions for the mmap_lock when lockdep
> > is disabled.
> > 
> > I have an ack on the first patch from Peter, so I would like to see this
> > merged through the XFS tree since most of what it touches is XFS.
> 
> What needs to happen to get these picked up to not miss the next merge
> window?

Rebase against xfs-linux for-next, then send Chandan a pull request.

That would have gotten done this morning, only now everything's on hold
again while we wait for the mm maintainers to get around to reviewing
the patches in the xfile diet v3 series:
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-xfs/87frxva65g.fsf@debian-BULLSEYE-live-builder-AMD64/T/#m99f2f7e1fb221c4d7f5a00f249119d570ab70fce

Yes I know you already reviewed all of them (again, thank you!) but
apparently your RVB tag is not good enough for the very high standards
of the kernel community.  In the mean time, the only thing we can do is
wait patiently and hope that one of the maintainers can free up enough
time to take a look.

</sarcasm>

--D