On Fri, May 22, 2026 at 9:36 PM Barry Song <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Fri, May 22, 2026 at 9:09 PM Matthew Wilcox <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > On Fri, May 22, 2026 at 10:33:05AM +0800, Barry Song (Xiaomi) wrote: > > > need to touch `filemap.c` at all (probably because you are already > > > maintaining `filemap.c` perfectly): > > > > I'm going to give you one chance to apologise for that. > > Apologies if my wording caused any misunderstanding. > That was not my intention at all. > > What I meant is that filemap.c already has a very > solid design. > > For memory.c, I had to touch several places for the > blacklist; otherwise, the kernel would hang. > > But for filemap.c, I basically didn't need to touch > anything, and preliminary testing shows no issues after > moving it from the whitelist to the blacklist. This is
Sorry, I feel I may be causing some misunderstanding again. By "whitelist", I mean I used to allow certain cases to use per-vma retry. By "blacklist", I mean I am now moving to disallow certain cases from using per-vma retry. Right now, I have to add several cases in memory.c to the blacklist; otherwise, the kernel would hang. But it seems that everything in filemap.c is fine so far based on testing. I'm not sure if I've explained things clearly. Please let me know if anything is still unclear or insufficient.
