Re: [PATCH v2 00/40] mm: make VMA flag semantics explicit, eliminate VM_SPECIAL
From: Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com>
Date: 2026-09-18 20:31:39
Also in:
bpf, fuse-devel, kvm, kvm-riscv, kvmarm, linux-arch, linux-doc, linux-fsdevel, linux-mm, linux-perf-users, linux-rdma, linux-s390, linux-scsi, linux-sound, linux-trace-kernel, linux-usb, linuxppc-dev, lkml, selinux, sparclinux
On Fri, Sep 18, 2026 at 1:21 PM David Hildenbrand (Arm) [off-list ref] wrote:
On 9/15/26 03:08, Andrew Morton wrote:quoted
On Mon, 14 Sep 2026 15:57:20 +0100 "Lorenzo Stoakes (ARM)" [off-list ref] wrote:quoted
The VM_SPECIAL / VMA_SPECIAL_FLAGS mask conflates several unrelated properties: ... It's all rather a mess. This series brings some order to things by both limiting what drivers can do with VMA flags and switching to using predicates that describe behaviour, not arbitrary flags.That's a lot of patches. Review is thin and I expect this won't improve a lot. Lots of "no functional changes" changes.I'll expect to go through all of them. Might just take a bit ;)
ditto
-- Cheers, David