On Thu, Apr 16, 2026 at 09:25:25PM +0100, Kiryl Shutsemau wrote: > > b) obviously means that we cannot use uffd-wp and uffd-rwp at the same > > time in the same uffd area. I guess that should be acceptable for the > > use cases we you should have in mind? > > I took a different path: I still use PROT_NONE PTEs, so it cannot > co-exist with NUMA balancing [fully], but WP + RWP should be fine. I > need to add a test for this.
WP + RWP works. Test case added. -- Kiryl Shutsemau / Kirill A. Shutemov
