From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: will.deacon@arm.com (Will Deacon) Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2017 18:16:27 +0000 Subject: [PATCH v3] arm64: mm: Fix NOMAP page initialization In-Reply-To: <20170203151414.GE16822@rric.localdomain> References: <20170109115320.GI4930@rric.localdomain> <20170112160535.GF13843@arm.com> <20170112185825.GE5020@rric.localdomain> <20170113091903.GA22538@arm.com> <20170113131500.GS4930@rric.localdomain> <20170117100015.GG5020@rric.localdomain> <20170117191656.GS27328@arm.com> <20170203151414.GE16822@rric.localdomain> Message-ID: <20170203181626.GL23547@arm.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Fri, Feb 03, 2017 at 04:14:14PM +0100, Robert Richter wrote: > On 17.01.17 19:16:56, Will Deacon wrote: > > I can't really see the trend given that, for system time, your > > pfn_valid_within results have a variance of ~9 and the early_pfn_valid > > results have a variance of ~92. Given that the variance seems to come > > about due to the reboots, I think we need more numbers to establish whether > > the data sets end up largely overlapping or if they really are disjoint. > > Assuming the numbers of both versions are not significant, please > apply one or the other. I'd rather apply the pfn_valid_within version, but please can you Ack the patch first, since there was some confusion when it was posted about a translation fault that was never reproduced. Thanks, Will