Lorenzo Stoakes wrote:
> This is preferred to the existing f_op->mmap() hook as it does require a
> VMA to be established yet,
Did you mean ".. doesn't require a VMA to be established yet, ..."
David
On Mon, 2025-06-16 at 21:41 +0100, Al Viro wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 16, 2025 at 08:33:19PM +0100, Lorenzo Stoakes wrote:
> > REVIEWER'S NOTES
> >
> >
> > I am basing this on the mm-new branch in Andrew's tree, so let me know if I
> > should rebase anything here. Given the mm bits touc
On Tue, Jun 17, 2025 at 09:45:32AM -0400, Jeff Layton wrote:
> On Mon, 2025-06-16 at 21:41 +0100, Al Viro wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 16, 2025 at 08:33:19PM +0100, Lorenzo Stoakes wrote:
> > > REVIEWER'S NOTES
> > >
> > >
> > > I am basing this on the mm-new branch in Andrew's tree, so
On Tue, Jun 17, 2025 at 03:05:59PM +0100, David Howells wrote:
> Lorenzo Stoakes wrote:
>
> > This is preferred to the existing f_op->mmap() hook as it does require a
> > VMA to be established yet,
>
> Did you mean ".. doesn't require a VMA to be established yet, ..."
>
> David
>
Yeah apologies,
On Mon, Jun 16, 2025 at 04:11:11PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Mon, 16 Jun 2025 20:33:19 +0100 Lorenzo Stoakes
> wrote:
>
> > I am basing this on the mm-new branch in Andrew's tree, so let me know if I
> > should rebase anything here. Given the mm bits touched I did think perhaps
> > we sho
On Mon, 16 Jun 2025 20:33:19 +0100, Lorenzo Stoakes wrote:
> REVIEWER'S NOTES
>
>
> I am basing this on the mm-new branch in Andrew's tree, so let me know if I
> should rebase anything here. Given the mm bits touched I did think perhaps
> we should take it through the mm tree, how
Mailserver is rejecting with "too many recipients" - ai
On Mon, Jun 16, 2025 at 08:33:19PM +0100, Lorenzo Stoakes wrote:
> REVIEWER'S NOTES
>
>
> I am basing this on the mm-new branch in Andrew's tree, so let me know if I
> should rebase anything here. Given the mm bits touch
