Re: [PATCH v2 01/14] mm: Batch-copy PTE ranges during fork()

[David Hildenbrand]

> > One could simply skip batching for now on pte_protnone() and focus on the
> > "writable" vs. "not-writable".
>
> I'm not sure we can simply "skip" batching on pte_protnone() since we will need
> to terminate the batch if we spot it. But if we have to look for it anyway, we
> might as well just terminate the batch when the value of pte_protnone()
> *changes*. I'm also proposing to take this approach for pte_uffd_wp() which also
> needs to be carefully preserved per-pte.

Yes, that's what I meant.

--
Cheers,

David / dhildenb