On Wed May 6, 2026 at 8:07 AM UTC, Takahiro Itazuri wrote: > Hi Lorenzo and Sean, > > Apologies for the delayed reply — Nikita is leaving Amazon, and I'm > taking over this series going forward. Thanks for your patience. > > On Tue, Apr 21, 2026 at 01:40:00PM +0000, Lorenzo Stoakes wrote: >> Hm, given this touches a fair bit of mm, I wonder if we shouldn't try to do >> this >> through the mm tree? > > On Tue, Apr 21, 2026 at 04:36:00PM +0000, Sean Christopherson wrote: >> Yeah, when the time comes, the mm pieces definitely need to go through the mm >> tree. Ideally, I think this would be merged in two separate parts, with all >> mm >> changes going through the mm tree, and then the KVM changes through the KVM >> tree >> using a stable topic branch/tag from Andrew. > > Thanks for the guidance. The split makes sense to me; I'm planning to > follow this approach with patches 1-6 (mm) going through the mm tree > and patches 7-16 (KVM) through the KVM tree on top of a stable > branch/tag from mm. I'll confirm the exact boundary and coordination > details as I prepare the repost. > > On Tue, Apr 21, 2026 at 01:40:00PM +0000, Lorenzo Stoakes wrote: >> In any case, we definitely need a rebase on something not-next :) if not mm >> then >> Linus's tree at least maybe? >> >> I'm seeing a lot of conflicts against mm-unstable, it can't b4 shazam even >> patch >> 1 and in Linus's tree it's failing at an mm patch (mm: introduce >> AS_NO_DIRECT_MAP). >
Just as an FYI, I am gonna look at trying to move this forward a bit while Takahiro ramps up on taking over (I spoke to him about this off list). My ulterior motive is that this would give me an excuse to add ALLOC_UNMAPPED (formerly __GFP_UNMAPPED) and the mermap [0] which unblocks various security nonsense including ASI [1]. (But also, this feature is a good idea). [0] https://lore.kernel.org/all/[email protected]/ [1] https://linuxasi.dev
