All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Mike Rapoport <rppt@kernel.org>
To: Kefeng Wang <wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com>
Cc: Anshuman Khandual <anshuman.khandual@arm.com>,
	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
	David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.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>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: arm32: panic in move_freepages (Was [PATCH v2 0/4] arm64: drop pfn_valid_within() and simplify pfn_valid())
Date: Wed, 12 May 2021 11:26:37 +0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <YJuRPVWubjQKyKBj@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <c3006cd0-fff6-ab45-da83-a216d40388f2@huawei.com>

On Wed, May 12, 2021 at 11:08:14AM +0800, Kefeng Wang wrote:
> 
> On 2021/5/11 16:48, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> > On Mon, May 10, 2021 at 11:10:20AM +0800, Kefeng Wang wrote:
> > > 
> > > > > The memory is not continuous, see MEMBLOCK:
> > > > >    memory size = 0x4c0fffff reserved size = 0x027ef058
> > > > >    memory.cnt  = 0xa
> > > > >    memory[0x0]    [0x80a00000-0x855fffff], 0x04c00000 bytes flags: 0x0
> > > > >    memory[0x1]    [0x86a00000-0x87dfffff], 0x01400000 bytes flags: 0x0
> > > > >    memory[0x2]    [0x8bd00000-0x8c4fffff], 0x00800000 bytes flags: 0x0
> > > > >    memory[0x3]    [0x8e300000-0x8ecfffff], 0x00a00000 bytes flags: 0x0
> > > > >    memory[0x4]    [0x90d00000-0xbfffffff], 0x2f300000 bytes flags: 0x0
> > > > >    memory[0x5]    [0xcc000000-0xdc9fffff], 0x10a00000 bytes flags: 0x0
> > > > >    memory[0x6]    [0xde700000-0xde9fffff], 0x00300000 bytes flags: 0x0
> > > > > ...
> > > > > 
> > > > > The pfn_range [0xde600,0xde700] => addr_range [0xde600000,0xde700000]
> > > > > is not available memory, and we won't create memmap , so with or without
> > > > > your patch, we can't see the range in free_memmap(), right?
> > > > 
> > > > This is not available memory and we won't see the reange in free_memmap(),
> > > > but we still should create memmap for it and that's what my patch tried to
> > > > do.
> > > > 
> > > > There are a lot of places in core mm that operate on pageblocks and
> > > > free_unused_memmap() should make sure that any pageblock has a valid memory
> > > > map.
> > > > 
> > > > Currently, that's not the case when SPARSEMEM=y and my patch tried to fix
> > > > it.
> > > > 
> > > > Can you please send log with my patch applied and with the printing of
> > > > ranges that are freed in free_unused_memmap() you've used in previous
> > > > mails?
> > 
> > > with your patch[1] and debug print in free_memmap,
> > > ----> free_memmap, start_pfn = 85800,  85800000 end_pfn = 86800, 86800000
> > > ----> free_memmap, start_pfn = 8c800,  8c800000 end_pfn = 8e000, 8e000000
> > > ----> free_memmap, start_pfn = 8f000,  8f000000 end_pfn = 90000, 90000000
> > > ----> free_memmap, start_pfn = dcc00,  dcc00000 end_pfn = de400, de400000
> > > ----> free_memmap, start_pfn = dec00,  dec00000 end_pfn = e0000, e0000000
> > > ----> free_memmap, start_pfn = e0c00,  e0c00000 end_pfn = e4000, e4000000
> > > ----> free_memmap, start_pfn = f7000,  f7000000 end_pfn = f8000, f8000000
> > 
> > It seems that freeing of the memory map is suboptimal still because that
> > code was not designed for memory layout that has more holes than Swiss
> > cheese.
> > 
> > Still, the range [0xde600,0xde700] is not freed and there should be struct
> > pages for this range.
> > 
> > Can you add
> > 
> > 	dump_page(pfn_to_page(0xde600), "");
> > 
> > say, in the end of memblock_free_all()?
> > 
> The range [0xde600,0xde700] is not memory, so it won't create struct page
> for it when sparse_init?

sparse_init() indeed does not create memory map for unpopulated memory, but
it has pretty coarse granularity, i.e. 64M in your configuration. A hole
should be at least 64M in order to skip allocation of the memory map for
it.

For example, your memory layout has a hole of 192M at pfn 0xc0000 and this
hole won't have the memory map.

However the hole 0xdca00 - 0xde70 will still have a memory map in the
section  that covers 0xdc000 - 0xe0000.

I've tried outline this in a sketch below, hope it helps.

Memory:
                          c0000      cc000                      dca00
--------------------------+          +--------------------------+ +----+
 memory bank              |<- hole ->| memory bank              | | mb |
--------------------------+          +--------------------------+ +----+
                                                                de700  dea00

Memory map:

b0000    b4000            c0000      cc000   d0000    d8000    dc000
+--------+--------+- ... -+          +--------+- ... -+--------+---------+
| memmap | memmap | ...   |<- hole ->| memmap |  ...  | memmap | memmap  |
+--------+--------+- ... -+          +--------+- ... -+--------+---------+


> After apply patch[1], the dump_page log,
> 
> page:ef3cc000 is uninitialized and poisoned
> raw: ffffffff ffffffff ffffffff ffffffff ffffffff ffffffff ffffffff ffffffff
> page dumped because:

This means that there is a memory map entry, and it got poisoned during the
initialization and never got reinitialized to sensible values, which would
be PageReserved() in this case.

I believe this was fixed by commit 0740a50b9baa ("mm/page_alloc.c: refactor
initialization of struct page for holes in memory layout") in the mainline
tree.

Can you backport it to your 5.10 tree and check if it helps?
 
-- 
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: Kefeng Wang <wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com>
Cc: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Anshuman Khandual <anshuman.khandual@arm.com>,
	Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org>,
	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.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: arm32: panic in move_freepages (Was [PATCH v2 0/4] arm64: drop pfn_valid_within() and simplify pfn_valid())
Date: Wed, 12 May 2021 11:26:37 +0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <YJuRPVWubjQKyKBj@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <c3006cd0-fff6-ab45-da83-a216d40388f2@huawei.com>

On Wed, May 12, 2021 at 11:08:14AM +0800, Kefeng Wang wrote:
> 
> On 2021/5/11 16:48, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> > On Mon, May 10, 2021 at 11:10:20AM +0800, Kefeng Wang wrote:
> > > 
> > > > > The memory is not continuous, see MEMBLOCK:
> > > > >    memory size = 0x4c0fffff reserved size = 0x027ef058
> > > > >    memory.cnt  = 0xa
> > > > >    memory[0x0]    [0x80a00000-0x855fffff], 0x04c00000 bytes flags: 0x0
> > > > >    memory[0x1]    [0x86a00000-0x87dfffff], 0x01400000 bytes flags: 0x0
> > > > >    memory[0x2]    [0x8bd00000-0x8c4fffff], 0x00800000 bytes flags: 0x0
> > > > >    memory[0x3]    [0x8e300000-0x8ecfffff], 0x00a00000 bytes flags: 0x0
> > > > >    memory[0x4]    [0x90d00000-0xbfffffff], 0x2f300000 bytes flags: 0x0
> > > > >    memory[0x5]    [0xcc000000-0xdc9fffff], 0x10a00000 bytes flags: 0x0
> > > > >    memory[0x6]    [0xde700000-0xde9fffff], 0x00300000 bytes flags: 0x0
> > > > > ...
> > > > > 
> > > > > The pfn_range [0xde600,0xde700] => addr_range [0xde600000,0xde700000]
> > > > > is not available memory, and we won't create memmap , so with or without
> > > > > your patch, we can't see the range in free_memmap(), right?
> > > > 
> > > > This is not available memory and we won't see the reange in free_memmap(),
> > > > but we still should create memmap for it and that's what my patch tried to
> > > > do.
> > > > 
> > > > There are a lot of places in core mm that operate on pageblocks and
> > > > free_unused_memmap() should make sure that any pageblock has a valid memory
> > > > map.
> > > > 
> > > > Currently, that's not the case when SPARSEMEM=y and my patch tried to fix
> > > > it.
> > > > 
> > > > Can you please send log with my patch applied and with the printing of
> > > > ranges that are freed in free_unused_memmap() you've used in previous
> > > > mails?
> > 
> > > with your patch[1] and debug print in free_memmap,
> > > ----> free_memmap, start_pfn = 85800,  85800000 end_pfn = 86800, 86800000
> > > ----> free_memmap, start_pfn = 8c800,  8c800000 end_pfn = 8e000, 8e000000
> > > ----> free_memmap, start_pfn = 8f000,  8f000000 end_pfn = 90000, 90000000
> > > ----> free_memmap, start_pfn = dcc00,  dcc00000 end_pfn = de400, de400000
> > > ----> free_memmap, start_pfn = dec00,  dec00000 end_pfn = e0000, e0000000
> > > ----> free_memmap, start_pfn = e0c00,  e0c00000 end_pfn = e4000, e4000000
> > > ----> free_memmap, start_pfn = f7000,  f7000000 end_pfn = f8000, f8000000
> > 
> > It seems that freeing of the memory map is suboptimal still because that
> > code was not designed for memory layout that has more holes than Swiss
> > cheese.
> > 
> > Still, the range [0xde600,0xde700] is not freed and there should be struct
> > pages for this range.
> > 
> > Can you add
> > 
> > 	dump_page(pfn_to_page(0xde600), "");
> > 
> > say, in the end of memblock_free_all()?
> > 
> The range [0xde600,0xde700] is not memory, so it won't create struct page
> for it when sparse_init?

sparse_init() indeed does not create memory map for unpopulated memory, but
it has pretty coarse granularity, i.e. 64M in your configuration. A hole
should be at least 64M in order to skip allocation of the memory map for
it.

For example, your memory layout has a hole of 192M at pfn 0xc0000 and this
hole won't have the memory map.

However the hole 0xdca00 - 0xde70 will still have a memory map in the
section  that covers 0xdc000 - 0xe0000.

I've tried outline this in a sketch below, hope it helps.

Memory:
                          c0000      cc000                      dca00
--------------------------+          +--------------------------+ +----+
 memory bank              |<- hole ->| memory bank              | | mb |
--------------------------+          +--------------------------+ +----+
                                                                de700  dea00

Memory map:

b0000    b4000            c0000      cc000   d0000    d8000    dc000
+--------+--------+- ... -+          +--------+- ... -+--------+---------+
| memmap | memmap | ...   |<- hole ->| memmap |  ...  | memmap | memmap  |
+--------+--------+- ... -+          +--------+- ... -+--------+---------+


> After apply patch[1], the dump_page log,
> 
> page:ef3cc000 is uninitialized and poisoned
> raw: ffffffff ffffffff ffffffff ffffffff ffffffff ffffffff ffffffff ffffffff
> page dumped because:

This means that there is a memory map entry, and it got poisoned during the
initialization and never got reinitialized to sensible values, which would
be PageReserved() in this case.

I believe this was fixed by commit 0740a50b9baa ("mm/page_alloc.c: refactor
initialization of struct page for holes in memory layout") in the mainline
tree.

Can you backport it to your 5.10 tree and check if it helps?
 
-- 
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: Kefeng Wang <wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com>
Cc: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Anshuman Khandual <anshuman.khandual@arm.com>,
	Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org>,
	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.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: arm32: panic in move_freepages (Was [PATCH v2 0/4] arm64: drop pfn_valid_within() and simplify pfn_valid())
Date: Wed, 12 May 2021 11:26:37 +0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <YJuRPVWubjQKyKBj@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <c3006cd0-fff6-ab45-da83-a216d40388f2@huawei.com>

On Wed, May 12, 2021 at 11:08:14AM +0800, Kefeng Wang wrote:
> 
> On 2021/5/11 16:48, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> > On Mon, May 10, 2021 at 11:10:20AM +0800, Kefeng Wang wrote:
> > > 
> > > > > The memory is not continuous, see MEMBLOCK:
> > > > >    memory size = 0x4c0fffff reserved size = 0x027ef058
> > > > >    memory.cnt  = 0xa
> > > > >    memory[0x0]    [0x80a00000-0x855fffff], 0x04c00000 bytes flags: 0x0
> > > > >    memory[0x1]    [0x86a00000-0x87dfffff], 0x01400000 bytes flags: 0x0
> > > > >    memory[0x2]    [0x8bd00000-0x8c4fffff], 0x00800000 bytes flags: 0x0
> > > > >    memory[0x3]    [0x8e300000-0x8ecfffff], 0x00a00000 bytes flags: 0x0
> > > > >    memory[0x4]    [0x90d00000-0xbfffffff], 0x2f300000 bytes flags: 0x0
> > > > >    memory[0x5]    [0xcc000000-0xdc9fffff], 0x10a00000 bytes flags: 0x0
> > > > >    memory[0x6]    [0xde700000-0xde9fffff], 0x00300000 bytes flags: 0x0
> > > > > ...
> > > > > 
> > > > > The pfn_range [0xde600,0xde700] => addr_range [0xde600000,0xde700000]
> > > > > is not available memory, and we won't create memmap , so with or without
> > > > > your patch, we can't see the range in free_memmap(), right?
> > > > 
> > > > This is not available memory and we won't see the reange in free_memmap(),
> > > > but we still should create memmap for it and that's what my patch tried to
> > > > do.
> > > > 
> > > > There are a lot of places in core mm that operate on pageblocks and
> > > > free_unused_memmap() should make sure that any pageblock has a valid memory
> > > > map.
> > > > 
> > > > Currently, that's not the case when SPARSEMEM=y and my patch tried to fix
> > > > it.
> > > > 
> > > > Can you please send log with my patch applied and with the printing of
> > > > ranges that are freed in free_unused_memmap() you've used in previous
> > > > mails?
> > 
> > > with your patch[1] and debug print in free_memmap,
> > > ----> free_memmap, start_pfn = 85800,  85800000 end_pfn = 86800, 86800000
> > > ----> free_memmap, start_pfn = 8c800,  8c800000 end_pfn = 8e000, 8e000000
> > > ----> free_memmap, start_pfn = 8f000,  8f000000 end_pfn = 90000, 90000000
> > > ----> free_memmap, start_pfn = dcc00,  dcc00000 end_pfn = de400, de400000
> > > ----> free_memmap, start_pfn = dec00,  dec00000 end_pfn = e0000, e0000000
> > > ----> free_memmap, start_pfn = e0c00,  e0c00000 end_pfn = e4000, e4000000
> > > ----> free_memmap, start_pfn = f7000,  f7000000 end_pfn = f8000, f8000000
> > 
> > It seems that freeing of the memory map is suboptimal still because that
> > code was not designed for memory layout that has more holes than Swiss
> > cheese.
> > 
> > Still, the range [0xde600,0xde700] is not freed and there should be struct
> > pages for this range.
> > 
> > Can you add
> > 
> > 	dump_page(pfn_to_page(0xde600), "");
> > 
> > say, in the end of memblock_free_all()?
> > 
> The range [0xde600,0xde700] is not memory, so it won't create struct page
> for it when sparse_init?

sparse_init() indeed does not create memory map for unpopulated memory, but
it has pretty coarse granularity, i.e. 64M in your configuration. A hole
should be at least 64M in order to skip allocation of the memory map for
it.

For example, your memory layout has a hole of 192M at pfn 0xc0000 and this
hole won't have the memory map.

However the hole 0xdca00 - 0xde70 will still have a memory map in the
section  that covers 0xdc000 - 0xe0000.

I've tried outline this in a sketch below, hope it helps.

Memory:
                          c0000      cc000                      dca00
--------------------------+          +--------------------------+ +----+
 memory bank              |<- hole ->| memory bank              | | mb |
--------------------------+          +--------------------------+ +----+
                                                                de700  dea00

Memory map:

b0000    b4000            c0000      cc000   d0000    d8000    dc000
+--------+--------+- ... -+          +--------+- ... -+--------+---------+
| memmap | memmap | ...   |<- hole ->| memmap |  ...  | memmap | memmap  |
+--------+--------+- ... -+          +--------+- ... -+--------+---------+


> After apply patch[1], the dump_page log,
> 
> page:ef3cc000 is uninitialized and poisoned
> raw: ffffffff ffffffff ffffffff ffffffff ffffffff ffffffff ffffffff ffffffff
> page dumped because:

This means that there is a memory map entry, and it got poisoned during the
initialization and never got reinitialized to sensible values, which would
be PageReserved() in this case.

I believe this was fixed by commit 0740a50b9baa ("mm/page_alloc.c: refactor
initialization of struct page for holes in memory layout") in the mainline
tree.

Can you backport it to your 5.10 tree and check if it helps?
 
-- 
Sincerely yours,
Mike.


  reply	other threads:[~2021-05-12  8:26 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 143+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-04-21  6:51 [PATCH v2 0/4] arm64: drop pfn_valid_within() and simplify pfn_valid() Mike Rapoport
2021-04-21  6:51 ` Mike Rapoport
2021-04-21  6:51 ` Mike Rapoport
2021-04-21  6:51 ` [PATCH v2 1/4] include/linux/mmzone.h: add documentation for pfn_valid() Mike Rapoport
2021-04-21  6:51   ` Mike Rapoport
2021-04-21  6:51   ` Mike Rapoport
2021-04-21 10:49   ` Anshuman Khandual
2021-04-21 10:49     ` Anshuman Khandual
2021-04-21 10:49     ` Anshuman Khandual
2021-04-21  6:51 ` [PATCH v2 2/4] memblock: update initialization of reserved pages Mike Rapoport
2021-04-21  6:51   ` Mike Rapoport
2021-04-21  6:51   ` Mike Rapoport
2021-04-21  7:49   ` David Hildenbrand
2021-04-21  7:49     ` David Hildenbrand
2021-04-21  7:49     ` David Hildenbrand
2021-04-21 10:51   ` Anshuman Khandual
2021-04-21 10:51     ` Anshuman Khandual
2021-04-21 10:51     ` Anshuman Khandual
2021-04-21  6:51 ` [PATCH v2 3/4] arm64: decouple check whether pfn is in linear map from pfn_valid() Mike Rapoport
2021-04-21  6:51   ` Mike Rapoport
2021-04-21  6:51   ` Mike Rapoport
2021-04-21 10:59   ` Anshuman Khandual
2021-04-21 10:59     ` Anshuman Khandual
2021-04-21 10:59     ` Anshuman Khandual
2021-04-21 12:19     ` Mike Rapoport
2021-04-21 12:19       ` Mike Rapoport
2021-04-21 12:19       ` Mike Rapoport
2021-04-21 13:13       ` Anshuman Khandual
2021-04-21 13:13         ` Anshuman Khandual
2021-04-21 13:13         ` Anshuman Khandual
2021-04-21  6:51 ` [PATCH v2 4/4] arm64: drop pfn_valid_within() and simplify pfn_valid() Mike Rapoport
2021-04-21  6:51   ` Mike Rapoport
2021-04-21  6:51   ` Mike Rapoport
2021-04-21  7:49   ` David Hildenbrand
2021-04-21  7:49     ` David Hildenbrand
2021-04-21  7:49     ` David Hildenbrand
2021-04-21 11:06   ` Anshuman Khandual
2021-04-21 11:06     ` Anshuman Khandual
2021-04-21 11:06     ` Anshuman Khandual
2021-04-21 12:24     ` Mike Rapoport
2021-04-21 12:24       ` Mike Rapoport
2021-04-21 12:24       ` Mike Rapoport
2021-04-21 13:15       ` Anshuman Khandual
2021-04-21 13:15         ` Anshuman Khandual
2021-04-21 13:15         ` Anshuman Khandual
2021-04-22  7:00 ` [PATCH v2 0/4] " Kefeng Wang
2021-04-22  7:00   ` Kefeng Wang
2021-04-22  7:00   ` Kefeng Wang
2021-04-22  7:29   ` Mike Rapoport
2021-04-22  7:29     ` Mike Rapoport
2021-04-22  7:29     ` Mike Rapoport
2021-04-22 15:28     ` Kefeng Wang
2021-04-22 15:28       ` Kefeng Wang
2021-04-22 15:28       ` Kefeng Wang
2021-04-23  8:11       ` Kefeng Wang
2021-04-23  8:11         ` Kefeng Wang
2021-04-23  8:11         ` Kefeng Wang
2021-04-25  7:19         ` arm32: panic in move_freepages (Was [PATCH v2 0/4] arm64: drop pfn_valid_within() and simplify pfn_valid()) Mike Rapoport
2021-04-25  7:19           ` Mike Rapoport
2021-04-25  7:19           ` Mike Rapoport
2021-04-25  7:51           ` Kefeng Wang
2021-04-25  7:51             ` Kefeng Wang
2021-04-26  5:20             ` Mike Rapoport
2021-04-26  5:20               ` Mike Rapoport
2021-04-26  5:20               ` Mike Rapoport
2021-04-26 15:26               ` Kefeng Wang
2021-04-26 15:26                 ` Kefeng Wang
2021-04-26 15:26                 ` Kefeng Wang
2021-04-27  6:23                 ` Mike Rapoport
2021-04-27  6:23                   ` Mike Rapoport
2021-04-27  6:23                   ` Mike Rapoport
2021-04-27 11:08                   ` Kefeng Wang
2021-04-27 11:08                     ` Kefeng Wang
2021-04-27 11:08                     ` Kefeng Wang
2021-04-28  5:59                     ` Mike Rapoport
2021-04-28  5:59                       ` Mike Rapoport
2021-04-28  5:59                       ` Mike Rapoport
2021-04-29  0:48                       ` Kefeng Wang
2021-04-29  0:48                         ` Kefeng Wang
2021-04-29  0:48                         ` Kefeng Wang
2021-04-29  6:57                         ` Mike Rapoport
2021-04-29  6:57                           ` Mike Rapoport
2021-04-29  6:57                           ` Mike Rapoport
2021-04-29 10:22                           ` Kefeng Wang
2021-04-29 10:22                             ` Kefeng Wang
2021-04-29 10:22                             ` Kefeng Wang
2021-04-30  9:51                             ` Mike Rapoport
2021-04-30  9:51                               ` Mike Rapoport
2021-04-30  9:51                               ` Mike Rapoport
2021-04-30 11:24                               ` Kefeng Wang
2021-04-30 11:24                                 ` Kefeng Wang
2021-04-30 11:24                                 ` Kefeng Wang
2021-05-03  6:26                                 ` Mike Rapoport
2021-05-03  6:26                                   ` Mike Rapoport
2021-05-03  6:26                                   ` Mike Rapoport
2021-05-03  8:07                                   ` David Hildenbrand
2021-05-03  8:07                                     ` David Hildenbrand
2021-05-03  8:07                                     ` David Hildenbrand
2021-05-03  8:44                                     ` Mike Rapoport
2021-05-03  8:44                                       ` Mike Rapoport
2021-05-03  8:44                                       ` Mike Rapoport
2021-05-06 12:47                                       ` Kefeng Wang
2021-05-06 12:47                                         ` Kefeng Wang
2021-05-06 12:47                                         ` Kefeng Wang
2021-05-07  7:17                                         ` Kefeng Wang
2021-05-07  7:17                                           ` Kefeng Wang
2021-05-07  7:17                                           ` Kefeng Wang
2021-05-07 10:30                                           ` Mike Rapoport
2021-05-07 10:30                                             ` Mike Rapoport
2021-05-07 10:30                                             ` Mike Rapoport
2021-05-07 12:34                                             ` Kefeng Wang
2021-05-07 12:34                                               ` Kefeng Wang
2021-05-07 12:34                                               ` Kefeng Wang
2021-05-09  5:59                                               ` Mike Rapoport
2021-05-09  5:59                                                 ` Mike Rapoport
2021-05-09  5:59                                                 ` Mike Rapoport
2021-05-10  3:10                                                 ` Kefeng Wang
2021-05-10  3:10                                                   ` Kefeng Wang
2021-05-10  3:10                                                   ` Kefeng Wang
2021-05-11  8:48                                                   ` Mike Rapoport
2021-05-11  8:48                                                     ` Mike Rapoport
2021-05-11  8:48                                                     ` Mike Rapoport
2021-05-12  3:08                                                     ` Kefeng Wang
2021-05-12  3:08                                                       ` Kefeng Wang
2021-05-12  3:08                                                       ` Kefeng Wang
2021-05-12  8:26                                                       ` Mike Rapoport [this message]
2021-05-12  8:26                                                         ` Mike Rapoport
2021-05-12  8:26                                                         ` Mike Rapoport
2021-05-13  3:44                                                         ` Kefeng Wang
2021-05-13  3:44                                                           ` Kefeng Wang
2021-05-13  3:44                                                           ` Kefeng Wang
2021-05-13 10:55                                                           ` Mike Rapoport
2021-05-13 10:55                                                             ` Mike Rapoport
2021-05-13 10:55                                                             ` Mike Rapoport
2021-05-14  2:18                                                             ` Kefeng Wang
2021-05-14  2:18                                                               ` Kefeng Wang
2021-05-14  2:18                                                               ` Kefeng Wang
2021-05-12  3:50             ` Matthew Wilcox
2021-05-12  3:50               ` Matthew Wilcox
2021-05-12  3:50               ` Matthew Wilcox
2021-04-25  6:59       ` [PATCH v2 0/4] arm64: drop pfn_valid_within() and simplify pfn_valid() Mike Rapoport
2021-04-25  6:59         ` Mike Rapoport
2021-04-25  6:59         ` 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=YJuRPVWubjQKyKBj@kernel.org \
    --to=rppt@kernel.org \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.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=wangkefeng.wang@huawei.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.