From: Mike Rapoport <rppt@kernel.org>
To: Anshuman Khandual <anshuman.khandual@arm.com>
Cc: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.ibm.com>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu,
Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [RFC/RFT PATCH 2/3] arm64: decouple check whether pfn is normal memory from pfn_valid()
Date: Thu, 8 Apr 2021 09:00:52 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YG6cFKKimksg+FX3@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4a788546-b854-fd35-644a-f1d9075a9a78@arm.com>
On Thu, Apr 08, 2021 at 10:44:58AM +0530, Anshuman Khandual wrote:
>
> On 4/7/21 10:56 PM, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> > From: Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.ibm.com>
> >
> > The intended semantics of pfn_valid() is to verify whether there is a
> > struct page for the pfn in question and nothing else.
>
> Should there be a comment affirming this semantics interpretation, above the
> generic pfn_valid() in include/linux/mmzone.h ?
Yeah, that would have been helpful :)
> >
> > Yet, on arm64 it is used to distinguish memory areas that are mapped in the
> > linear map vs those that require ioremap() to access them.
> >
> > Introduce a dedicated pfn_is_memory() to perform such check and use it
> > where appropriate.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.ibm.com>
> > ---
> > arch/arm64/include/asm/memory.h | 2 +-
> > arch/arm64/include/asm/page.h | 1 +
> > arch/arm64/kvm/mmu.c | 2 +-
> > arch/arm64/mm/init.c | 6 ++++++
> > arch/arm64/mm/ioremap.c | 4 ++--
> > arch/arm64/mm/mmu.c | 2 +-
> > 6 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/memory.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/memory.h
> > index 0aabc3be9a75..7e77fdf71b9d 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/memory.h
> > +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/memory.h
> > @@ -351,7 +351,7 @@ static inline void *phys_to_virt(phys_addr_t x)
> >
> > #define virt_addr_valid(addr) ({ \
> > __typeof__(addr) __addr = __tag_reset(addr); \
> > - __is_lm_address(__addr) && pfn_valid(virt_to_pfn(__addr)); \
> > + __is_lm_address(__addr) && pfn_is_memory(virt_to_pfn(__addr)); \
> > })
> >
> > void dump_mem_limit(void);
> > diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/page.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/page.h
> > index 012cffc574e8..32b485bcc6ff 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/page.h
> > +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/page.h
> > @@ -38,6 +38,7 @@ void copy_highpage(struct page *to, struct page *from);
> > typedef struct page *pgtable_t;
> >
> > extern int pfn_valid(unsigned long);
> > +extern int pfn_is_memory(unsigned long);
> >
> > #include <asm/memory.h>
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/mmu.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/mmu.c
> > index 8711894db8c2..ad2ea65a3937 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/mmu.c
> > +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/mmu.c
> > @@ -85,7 +85,7 @@ void kvm_flush_remote_tlbs(struct kvm *kvm)
> >
> > static bool kvm_is_device_pfn(unsigned long pfn)
> > {
> > - return !pfn_valid(pfn);
> > + return !pfn_is_memory(pfn);
> > }
> >
> > /*
> > diff --git a/arch/arm64/mm/init.c b/arch/arm64/mm/init.c
> > index 3685e12aba9b..258b1905ed4a 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm64/mm/init.c
> > +++ b/arch/arm64/mm/init.c
> > @@ -258,6 +258,12 @@ int pfn_valid(unsigned long pfn)
> > }
> > EXPORT_SYMBOL(pfn_valid);
> >
> > +int pfn_is_memory(unsigned long pfn)
> > +{
> > + return memblock_is_map_memory(PFN_PHYS(pfn));
> > +}
> > +EXPORT_SYMBOL(pfn_is_memory);> +
>
> Should not this be generic though ? There is nothing platform or arm64
> specific in here.
As NOMAP itself is quite ARM specific, this check is currently only
relevant for arm64 and maybe arm32.
But probably having an EXPORT_SYMBOL wrapper for memblock_is_map_memory(),
say in memblock does make sense for all architectures that have
KEEP_MEMBLOCK.
> Wondering as pfn_is_memory() just indicates that the
> pfn is linear mapped, should not it be renamed as pfn_is_linear_memory()
> instead ? Regardless, it's fine either way.
Yeah, I agree that naming could be better here. I think that for a generic name
we'd need pfn_is_directly_mapped() so that it can be used on x86 ;-)
> > static phys_addr_t memory_limit = PHYS_ADDR_MAX;
> >
> > /*
> > diff --git a/arch/arm64/mm/ioremap.c b/arch/arm64/mm/ioremap.c
> > index b5e83c46b23e..82a369b22ef5 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm64/mm/ioremap.c
> > +++ b/arch/arm64/mm/ioremap.c
> > @@ -43,7 +43,7 @@ static void __iomem *__ioremap_caller(phys_addr_t phys_addr, size_t size,
> > /*
> > * Don't allow RAM to be mapped.
> > */
> > - if (WARN_ON(pfn_valid(__phys_to_pfn(phys_addr))))
> > + if (WARN_ON(pfn_is_memory(__phys_to_pfn(phys_addr))))
> > return NULL;
> >
> > area = get_vm_area_caller(size, VM_IOREMAP, caller);
> > @@ -84,7 +84,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(iounmap);
> > void __iomem *ioremap_cache(phys_addr_t phys_addr, size_t size)
> > {
> > /* For normal memory we already have a cacheable mapping. */
> > - if (pfn_valid(__phys_to_pfn(phys_addr)))
> > + if (pfn_is_memory(__phys_to_pfn(phys_addr)))
> > return (void __iomem *)__phys_to_virt(phys_addr);
> >
> > return __ioremap_caller(phys_addr, size, __pgprot(PROT_NORMAL),
> > diff --git a/arch/arm64/mm/mmu.c b/arch/arm64/mm/mmu.c
> > index 5d9550fdb9cf..038d20fe163f 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm64/mm/mmu.c
> > +++ b/arch/arm64/mm/mmu.c
> > @@ -81,7 +81,7 @@ void set_swapper_pgd(pgd_t *pgdp, pgd_t pgd)
> > pgprot_t phys_mem_access_prot(struct file *file, unsigned long pfn,
> > unsigned long size, pgprot_t vma_prot)
> > {
> > - if (!pfn_valid(pfn))
> > + if (!pfn_is_memory(pfn))
> > return pgprot_noncached(vma_prot);
> > else if (file->f_flags & O_SYNC)
> > return pgprot_writecombine(vma_prot);
> >
--
Sincerely yours,
Mike.
_______________________________________________
kvmarm mailing list
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Mike Rapoport <rppt@kernel.org>
To: Anshuman Khandual <anshuman.khandual@arm.com>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>,
Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.ibm.com>, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [RFC/RFT PATCH 2/3] arm64: decouple check whether pfn is normal memory from pfn_valid()
Date: Thu, 8 Apr 2021 09:00:52 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YG6cFKKimksg+FX3@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4a788546-b854-fd35-644a-f1d9075a9a78@arm.com>
On Thu, Apr 08, 2021 at 10:44:58AM +0530, Anshuman Khandual wrote:
>
> On 4/7/21 10:56 PM, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> > From: Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.ibm.com>
> >
> > The intended semantics of pfn_valid() is to verify whether there is a
> > struct page for the pfn in question and nothing else.
>
> Should there be a comment affirming this semantics interpretation, above the
> generic pfn_valid() in include/linux/mmzone.h ?
Yeah, that would have been helpful :)
> >
> > Yet, on arm64 it is used to distinguish memory areas that are mapped in the
> > linear map vs those that require ioremap() to access them.
> >
> > Introduce a dedicated pfn_is_memory() to perform such check and use it
> > where appropriate.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.ibm.com>
> > ---
> > arch/arm64/include/asm/memory.h | 2 +-
> > arch/arm64/include/asm/page.h | 1 +
> > arch/arm64/kvm/mmu.c | 2 +-
> > arch/arm64/mm/init.c | 6 ++++++
> > arch/arm64/mm/ioremap.c | 4 ++--
> > arch/arm64/mm/mmu.c | 2 +-
> > 6 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/memory.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/memory.h
> > index 0aabc3be9a75..7e77fdf71b9d 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/memory.h
> > +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/memory.h
> > @@ -351,7 +351,7 @@ static inline void *phys_to_virt(phys_addr_t x)
> >
> > #define virt_addr_valid(addr) ({ \
> > __typeof__(addr) __addr = __tag_reset(addr); \
> > - __is_lm_address(__addr) && pfn_valid(virt_to_pfn(__addr)); \
> > + __is_lm_address(__addr) && pfn_is_memory(virt_to_pfn(__addr)); \
> > })
> >
> > void dump_mem_limit(void);
> > diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/page.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/page.h
> > index 012cffc574e8..32b485bcc6ff 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/page.h
> > +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/page.h
> > @@ -38,6 +38,7 @@ void copy_highpage(struct page *to, struct page *from);
> > typedef struct page *pgtable_t;
> >
> > extern int pfn_valid(unsigned long);
> > +extern int pfn_is_memory(unsigned long);
> >
> > #include <asm/memory.h>
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/mmu.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/mmu.c
> > index 8711894db8c2..ad2ea65a3937 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/mmu.c
> > +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/mmu.c
> > @@ -85,7 +85,7 @@ void kvm_flush_remote_tlbs(struct kvm *kvm)
> >
> > static bool kvm_is_device_pfn(unsigned long pfn)
> > {
> > - return !pfn_valid(pfn);
> > + return !pfn_is_memory(pfn);
> > }
> >
> > /*
> > diff --git a/arch/arm64/mm/init.c b/arch/arm64/mm/init.c
> > index 3685e12aba9b..258b1905ed4a 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm64/mm/init.c
> > +++ b/arch/arm64/mm/init.c
> > @@ -258,6 +258,12 @@ int pfn_valid(unsigned long pfn)
> > }
> > EXPORT_SYMBOL(pfn_valid);
> >
> > +int pfn_is_memory(unsigned long pfn)
> > +{
> > + return memblock_is_map_memory(PFN_PHYS(pfn));
> > +}
> > +EXPORT_SYMBOL(pfn_is_memory);> +
>
> Should not this be generic though ? There is nothing platform or arm64
> specific in here.
As NOMAP itself is quite ARM specific, this check is currently only
relevant for arm64 and maybe arm32.
But probably having an EXPORT_SYMBOL wrapper for memblock_is_map_memory(),
say in memblock does make sense for all architectures that have
KEEP_MEMBLOCK.
> Wondering as pfn_is_memory() just indicates that the
> pfn is linear mapped, should not it be renamed as pfn_is_linear_memory()
> instead ? Regardless, it's fine either way.
Yeah, I agree that naming could be better here. I think that for a generic name
we'd need pfn_is_directly_mapped() so that it can be used on x86 ;-)
> > static phys_addr_t memory_limit = PHYS_ADDR_MAX;
> >
> > /*
> > diff --git a/arch/arm64/mm/ioremap.c b/arch/arm64/mm/ioremap.c
> > index b5e83c46b23e..82a369b22ef5 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm64/mm/ioremap.c
> > +++ b/arch/arm64/mm/ioremap.c
> > @@ -43,7 +43,7 @@ static void __iomem *__ioremap_caller(phys_addr_t phys_addr, size_t size,
> > /*
> > * Don't allow RAM to be mapped.
> > */
> > - if (WARN_ON(pfn_valid(__phys_to_pfn(phys_addr))))
> > + if (WARN_ON(pfn_is_memory(__phys_to_pfn(phys_addr))))
> > return NULL;
> >
> > area = get_vm_area_caller(size, VM_IOREMAP, caller);
> > @@ -84,7 +84,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(iounmap);
> > void __iomem *ioremap_cache(phys_addr_t phys_addr, size_t size)
> > {
> > /* For normal memory we already have a cacheable mapping. */
> > - if (pfn_valid(__phys_to_pfn(phys_addr)))
> > + if (pfn_is_memory(__phys_to_pfn(phys_addr)))
> > return (void __iomem *)__phys_to_virt(phys_addr);
> >
> > return __ioremap_caller(phys_addr, size, __pgprot(PROT_NORMAL),
> > diff --git a/arch/arm64/mm/mmu.c b/arch/arm64/mm/mmu.c
> > index 5d9550fdb9cf..038d20fe163f 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm64/mm/mmu.c
> > +++ b/arch/arm64/mm/mmu.c
> > @@ -81,7 +81,7 @@ void set_swapper_pgd(pgd_t *pgdp, pgd_t pgd)
> > pgprot_t phys_mem_access_prot(struct file *file, unsigned long pfn,
> > unsigned long size, pgprot_t vma_prot)
> > {
> > - if (!pfn_valid(pfn))
> > + if (!pfn_is_memory(pfn))
> > return pgprot_noncached(vma_prot);
> > else if (file->f_flags & O_SYNC)
> > return pgprot_writecombine(vma_prot);
> >
--
Sincerely yours,
Mike.
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Mike Rapoport <rppt@kernel.org>
To: Anshuman Khandual <anshuman.khandual@arm.com>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>,
Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.ibm.com>, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [RFC/RFT PATCH 2/3] arm64: decouple check whether pfn is normal memory from pfn_valid()
Date: Thu, 8 Apr 2021 09:00:52 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YG6cFKKimksg+FX3@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4a788546-b854-fd35-644a-f1d9075a9a78@arm.com>
On Thu, Apr 08, 2021 at 10:44:58AM +0530, Anshuman Khandual wrote:
>
> On 4/7/21 10:56 PM, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> > From: Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.ibm.com>
> >
> > The intended semantics of pfn_valid() is to verify whether there is a
> > struct page for the pfn in question and nothing else.
>
> Should there be a comment affirming this semantics interpretation, above the
> generic pfn_valid() in include/linux/mmzone.h ?
Yeah, that would have been helpful :)
> >
> > Yet, on arm64 it is used to distinguish memory areas that are mapped in the
> > linear map vs those that require ioremap() to access them.
> >
> > Introduce a dedicated pfn_is_memory() to perform such check and use it
> > where appropriate.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.ibm.com>
> > ---
> > arch/arm64/include/asm/memory.h | 2 +-
> > arch/arm64/include/asm/page.h | 1 +
> > arch/arm64/kvm/mmu.c | 2 +-
> > arch/arm64/mm/init.c | 6 ++++++
> > arch/arm64/mm/ioremap.c | 4 ++--
> > arch/arm64/mm/mmu.c | 2 +-
> > 6 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/memory.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/memory.h
> > index 0aabc3be9a75..7e77fdf71b9d 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/memory.h
> > +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/memory.h
> > @@ -351,7 +351,7 @@ static inline void *phys_to_virt(phys_addr_t x)
> >
> > #define virt_addr_valid(addr) ({ \
> > __typeof__(addr) __addr = __tag_reset(addr); \
> > - __is_lm_address(__addr) && pfn_valid(virt_to_pfn(__addr)); \
> > + __is_lm_address(__addr) && pfn_is_memory(virt_to_pfn(__addr)); \
> > })
> >
> > void dump_mem_limit(void);
> > diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/page.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/page.h
> > index 012cffc574e8..32b485bcc6ff 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/page.h
> > +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/page.h
> > @@ -38,6 +38,7 @@ void copy_highpage(struct page *to, struct page *from);
> > typedef struct page *pgtable_t;
> >
> > extern int pfn_valid(unsigned long);
> > +extern int pfn_is_memory(unsigned long);
> >
> > #include <asm/memory.h>
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/mmu.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/mmu.c
> > index 8711894db8c2..ad2ea65a3937 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/mmu.c
> > +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/mmu.c
> > @@ -85,7 +85,7 @@ void kvm_flush_remote_tlbs(struct kvm *kvm)
> >
> > static bool kvm_is_device_pfn(unsigned long pfn)
> > {
> > - return !pfn_valid(pfn);
> > + return !pfn_is_memory(pfn);
> > }
> >
> > /*
> > diff --git a/arch/arm64/mm/init.c b/arch/arm64/mm/init.c
> > index 3685e12aba9b..258b1905ed4a 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm64/mm/init.c
> > +++ b/arch/arm64/mm/init.c
> > @@ -258,6 +258,12 @@ int pfn_valid(unsigned long pfn)
> > }
> > EXPORT_SYMBOL(pfn_valid);
> >
> > +int pfn_is_memory(unsigned long pfn)
> > +{
> > + return memblock_is_map_memory(PFN_PHYS(pfn));
> > +}
> > +EXPORT_SYMBOL(pfn_is_memory);> +
>
> Should not this be generic though ? There is nothing platform or arm64
> specific in here.
As NOMAP itself is quite ARM specific, this check is currently only
relevant for arm64 and maybe arm32.
But probably having an EXPORT_SYMBOL wrapper for memblock_is_map_memory(),
say in memblock does make sense for all architectures that have
KEEP_MEMBLOCK.
> Wondering as pfn_is_memory() just indicates that the
> pfn is linear mapped, should not it be renamed as pfn_is_linear_memory()
> instead ? Regardless, it's fine either way.
Yeah, I agree that naming could be better here. I think that for a generic name
we'd need pfn_is_directly_mapped() so that it can be used on x86 ;-)
> > static phys_addr_t memory_limit = PHYS_ADDR_MAX;
> >
> > /*
> > diff --git a/arch/arm64/mm/ioremap.c b/arch/arm64/mm/ioremap.c
> > index b5e83c46b23e..82a369b22ef5 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm64/mm/ioremap.c
> > +++ b/arch/arm64/mm/ioremap.c
> > @@ -43,7 +43,7 @@ static void __iomem *__ioremap_caller(phys_addr_t phys_addr, size_t size,
> > /*
> > * Don't allow RAM to be mapped.
> > */
> > - if (WARN_ON(pfn_valid(__phys_to_pfn(phys_addr))))
> > + if (WARN_ON(pfn_is_memory(__phys_to_pfn(phys_addr))))
> > return NULL;
> >
> > area = get_vm_area_caller(size, VM_IOREMAP, caller);
> > @@ -84,7 +84,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(iounmap);
> > void __iomem *ioremap_cache(phys_addr_t phys_addr, size_t size)
> > {
> > /* For normal memory we already have a cacheable mapping. */
> > - if (pfn_valid(__phys_to_pfn(phys_addr)))
> > + if (pfn_is_memory(__phys_to_pfn(phys_addr)))
> > return (void __iomem *)__phys_to_virt(phys_addr);
> >
> > return __ioremap_caller(phys_addr, size, __pgprot(PROT_NORMAL),
> > diff --git a/arch/arm64/mm/mmu.c b/arch/arm64/mm/mmu.c
> > index 5d9550fdb9cf..038d20fe163f 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm64/mm/mmu.c
> > +++ b/arch/arm64/mm/mmu.c
> > @@ -81,7 +81,7 @@ void set_swapper_pgd(pgd_t *pgdp, pgd_t pgd)
> > pgprot_t phys_mem_access_prot(struct file *file, unsigned long pfn,
> > unsigned long size, pgprot_t vma_prot)
> > {
> > - if (!pfn_valid(pfn))
> > + if (!pfn_is_memory(pfn))
> > return pgprot_noncached(vma_prot);
> > else if (file->f_flags & O_SYNC)
> > return pgprot_writecombine(vma_prot);
> >
--
Sincerely yours,
Mike.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-04-08 6:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 77+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-04-07 17:26 [RFC/RFT PATCH 0/3] arm64: drop pfn_valid_within() and simplify pfn_valid() Mike Rapoport
2021-04-07 17:26 ` Mike Rapoport
2021-04-07 17:26 ` Mike Rapoport
2021-04-07 17:26 ` [RFC/RFT PATCH 1/3] memblock: update initialization of reserved pages Mike Rapoport
2021-04-07 17:26 ` Mike Rapoport
2021-04-07 17:26 ` Mike Rapoport
2021-04-08 5:16 ` Anshuman Khandual
2021-04-08 5:16 ` Anshuman Khandual
2021-04-08 5:16 ` Anshuman Khandual
2021-04-08 5:48 ` Mike Rapoport
2021-04-08 5:48 ` Mike Rapoport
2021-04-08 5:48 ` Mike Rapoport
2021-04-14 15:12 ` David Hildenbrand
2021-04-14 15:12 ` David Hildenbrand
2021-04-14 15:12 ` David Hildenbrand
2021-04-14 15:27 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2021-04-14 15:27 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2021-04-14 15:27 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2021-04-14 15:52 ` David Hildenbrand
2021-04-14 15:52 ` David Hildenbrand
2021-04-14 15:52 ` David Hildenbrand
2021-04-14 20:24 ` Mike Rapoport
2021-04-14 20:24 ` Mike Rapoport
2021-04-14 20:24 ` Mike Rapoport
2021-04-15 9:30 ` David Hildenbrand
2021-04-15 9:30 ` David Hildenbrand
2021-04-15 9:30 ` David Hildenbrand
2021-04-16 11:44 ` Mike Rapoport
2021-04-16 11:44 ` Mike Rapoport
2021-04-16 11:44 ` Mike Rapoport
2021-04-16 11:54 ` David Hildenbrand
2021-04-16 11:54 ` David Hildenbrand
2021-04-16 11:54 ` David Hildenbrand
2021-04-14 20:11 ` Mike Rapoport
2021-04-14 20:11 ` Mike Rapoport
2021-04-14 20:11 ` Mike Rapoport
2021-04-14 20:06 ` Mike Rapoport
2021-04-14 20:06 ` Mike Rapoport
2021-04-14 20:06 ` Mike Rapoport
2021-04-14 20:09 ` David Hildenbrand
2021-04-14 20:09 ` David Hildenbrand
2021-04-07 17:26 ` [RFC/RFT PATCH 2/3] arm64: decouple check whether pfn is normal memory from pfn_valid() Mike Rapoport
2021-04-07 17:26 ` Mike Rapoport
2021-04-07 17:26 ` Mike Rapoport
2021-04-08 5:14 ` Anshuman Khandual
2021-04-08 5:14 ` Anshuman Khandual
2021-04-08 5:14 ` Anshuman Khandual
2021-04-08 6:00 ` Mike Rapoport [this message]
2021-04-08 6:00 ` Mike Rapoport
2021-04-08 6:00 ` Mike Rapoport
2021-04-14 15:58 ` David Hildenbrand
2021-04-14 15:58 ` David Hildenbrand
2021-04-14 15:58 ` David Hildenbrand
2021-04-14 20:29 ` Mike Rapoport
2021-04-14 20:29 ` Mike Rapoport
2021-04-14 20:29 ` Mike Rapoport
2021-04-15 9:31 ` David Hildenbrand
2021-04-15 9:31 ` David Hildenbrand
2021-04-15 9:31 ` David Hildenbrand
2021-04-16 11:40 ` Mike Rapoport
2021-04-16 11:40 ` Mike Rapoport
2021-04-16 11:40 ` Mike Rapoport
2021-04-07 17:26 ` [RFC/RFT PATCH 3/3] arm64: drop pfn_valid_within() and simplify pfn_valid() Mike Rapoport
2021-04-07 17:26 ` Mike Rapoport
2021-04-07 17:26 ` Mike Rapoport
2021-04-08 5:12 ` Anshuman Khandual
2021-04-08 5:12 ` Anshuman Khandual
2021-04-08 5:12 ` Anshuman Khandual
2021-04-08 6:17 ` Mike Rapoport
2021-04-08 6:17 ` Mike Rapoport
2021-04-08 6:17 ` Mike Rapoport
2021-04-08 5:19 ` [RFC/RFT PATCH 0/3] " Anshuman Khandual
2021-04-08 5:19 ` Anshuman Khandual
2021-04-08 5:19 ` Anshuman Khandual
2021-04-08 6:27 ` Mike Rapoport
2021-04-08 6:27 ` Mike Rapoport
2021-04-08 6:27 ` Mike Rapoport
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=YG6cFKKimksg+FX3@kernel.org \
--to=rppt@kernel.org \
--cc=anshuman.khandual@arm.com \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=david@redhat.com \
--cc=kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=maz@kernel.org \
--cc=rppt@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.