From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id ED1D3BA2D; Tue, 4 Mar 2025 23:53:28 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1741132409; cv=none; b=XjctAS8uReeTikZqVGr34PZKTlEW+0PIQ6DO+OuMWhA8iRwvpdVEr+0askCaVTVqYSwjTs9lUIWuBdHcvn8tE/vHM+IfBzuHExsX3EGm03/HGnvl3iFT2yVHmdfZMrBJwnU7gmU3oqEkuljXnoHWUELFTI2BCP8J2Bwnn9WXRO8= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1741132409; c=relaxed/simple; bh=q4ihMWeSDYGy90QmpRS0XEWYMYyxawUw1y5E7gZ+Sa8=; h=Date:From:To:Subject:Message-Id:In-Reply-To:References: Mime-Version:Content-Type; b=JaPs3vmmxBsoyuuGh9LTLU2+Iul9qAPo/IAtDrGg7LEUAB/ua3S8QB0VI+LbKaOeuUCQeE3pOOuWcSyvJa7wciC8/QBflfjlhA2ZrtSgvgo1eX0zmyzAaRNuqk8AApAy0npLKac4Vt08KOf1oiPyfsU0Da5Kb2uslcASz007EJ4= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linux-foundation.org header.i=@linux-foundation.org header.b=wNRQrFVy; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linux-foundation.org header.i=@linux-foundation.org header.b="wNRQrFVy" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 515A5C4CEE5; Tue, 4 Mar 2025 23:53:28 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=linux-foundation.org; s=korg; t=1741132408; bh=q4ihMWeSDYGy90QmpRS0XEWYMYyxawUw1y5E7gZ+Sa8=; h=Date:From:To:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=wNRQrFVyFEe0fO6KvuTU05ovjEYjylU6yNMdXwoT+vAT1RwAeJwXDigVUNNXusFvB vbifi5NzMjDZmdMxGVi6hlYr6QwGft/wuXUkjyqoE5jKIt5NwHmfPYOnG1N2zcC3aP T86iJXnZMZq3K8txWYo6bmX1mK0QiOxhTGaXWyW4= Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2025 15:53:27 -0800 From: Andrew Morton To: Baoquan He , "Kirill A. Shutemov" , ebiederm@xmission.com, kexec@lists.infradead.org, Yan Zhao , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-coco@lists.linux.dev, x86@kernel.org, rick.p.edgecombe@intel.com, kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/1] Accept unaccepted kexec segments' destination addresses Message-Id: <20250304155327.4499dcbbfa2445f76927c6c3@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: <20250304154353.a79c330bffb4d21dce2dad9c@linux-foundation.org> References: <20241213094930.748-1-yan.y.zhao@intel.com> <20250304154353.a79c330bffb4d21dce2dad9c@linux-foundation.org> X-Mailer: Sylpheed 3.8.0beta1 (GTK+ 2.24.33; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-coco@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Tue, 4 Mar 2025 15:43:53 -0800 Andrew Morton wrote: > On Mon, 13 Jan 2025 19:12:27 +0800 Baoquan He wrote: > > > On 01/13/25 at 12:01pm, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote: > > > On Fri, Dec 13, 2024 at 05:49:30PM +0800, Yan Zhao wrote: > > > > Hi Eric, > > > > > > > > This is a repost of the patch "kexec_core: Accept unaccepted kexec > > > > destination addresses" [1], rebased to v6.13-rc2. > > > > > > Can we get this patch applied? > > > > This looks good to me. In v1, we have analyzed all other possible > > solutions, however change in this patch seems the simplest and most > > accepatable one. > > > > If Eric has no objection, maybe Andrew can help pick this into his tree. > > OK, but that patch is the only thing in the world which is older than me. > > Yan, can you please refresh, retest and resend? > > Also, please consolidate the changelogging into a single email - > a single-patch series with a coverletter is just weird. > > Putting the [0/n] info into the singleton patch's changelog is more > reader-friendly, and that's what counts, no? Oh, I remember this patch. Eric, your feedback has been unusably-by-me enigmatic :( In fact the whole multi-month review discussion has been quite indecisive. Yan, please go back through the discussion and incorporate reviewer feedback into the changelogs: describe the possible issues which people have raised and your responses to those. Then resend and then let us restart the review process. With less reviewer latency please!