On 10/13/26 20:06, Matthew Brost wrote:
On Tue, Oct 13, 2026 at 04:10:47PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
On Mon, Oct 12, 2026 at 02:21:41PM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
I've queued this series up for some testing, in a separate branch. JFYI.
More testing it obviously good. I've been waiting for addressing
of the Sashiko comments on the nvme patches before doing more ACKs,
and while I can't really judge the code those in the dma-buf code
also look somewhat serious. So it would be useful to get them addressed
and the series reposted. Same for folding in the PI vs dmabuf fix
from Anuj, although making the combination work would of course be
even better.
Oops, I forgot to look at Sashiko's feedback when I acked the dma-buf
patch. I think the two cleanup issues are valid,
I stopped answering to sashiko as it repeats the same from version
to version when false positive. Those two are warning paths, which
should never happen, I'd rather leak than crash on double free or
so.
but the reclaim-related
ones are not.
Thanks for confirming, you already elaborated on one of them in
previous revision, the new one looked to me as the same class of
issue as well.
I'm not sure why Sashiko is confused here.
I wonder if there are some shrinkers in the tree that incorrectly take
dma-resv locks in a blocking manner. They should only use trylocks in
shrinkers and direct reclaim paths.
--
Pavel Begunkov
