From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-alma10-1.taild15c8.ts.net [100.103.45.18]) (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 51310483BD9; Thu, 10 Sep 2026 14:42:01 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1789051322; cv=none; b=gXMpKpVoesGOH/+xOd5OqOQCq6XsIH5teqNje9XsYVza5Iw/wJFF5Gz0K+RPgFBIxcqWTTcF4VxF+dmZUpSRV9F7XcbbuwGY1Z+w4MsCWLAePGtV9o9UjgtGKY/yKqb7yCZ5YM+kGh8S22NZEmFOc24FGPa87IF9pmik7EVmnPc= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1789051322; c=relaxed/simple; bh=bXnkLTnssSsY9ddGTL62eQdAZhx+1qqBasXCrl5e9Ao=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=N2q3L7QOcYGQ4wENn3T5l+eLaRBJacRxBGpY203dt1JBJARBkOpbNV3yfoVhstqFd7dAGl2FOeceQwBPYyL4aTjYyiX5PdcuFD1Kz/spW7NFawSjaQxX9jymKWrFfqRO83uOmknVdCbUEFFynfAdRhbB2j32Ag4qrDQnB5iuMSQ= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=nckwhsbx; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="nckwhsbx" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id BB7721F00899; Thu, 10 Sep 2026 14:41:53 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel.org; s=k20260515; t=1789051320; bh=AC2aVlJGfM8BolgFPYicq3jFdCi6ZcStjOJlfIZLYLI=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To; b=nckwhsbxifazypO4vMSW527cot3mVYyWVuVZnS2y9QbRQSzX58sMrbJUtkltcSehy 54OcQSYm0JA9oGJgLHLeKRygrkgimIc6WV6T66RYGyAEAcMTlHocy2tTmElNoS7jFl bGSKek6YA30XoMC+vBx+2s6glRBX7BaqZ9OWguQqtOQ3HyLp6OjlWZSNeqpPpflYJz 1TmPI8aA3QdMbUjfoLoQyh6bHd1VDJsWvjQFvhE3JdimnnvZALWl4zyKJZgpt339C5 fSNBG9AQujVw7zaJk1hSUo0AUypE2bFCTyY7NIZ1qg/elrO5df8RFpMzNlQ3JdUWmu z9ghuwZPMAuIA== Date: Thu, 10 Sep 2026 15:41:51 +0100 From: "Lorenzo Stoakes (ARM)" To: "David Hildenbrand (Arm)" Cc: Andrew Morton , "Liam R. Howlett" , Vlastimil Babka , Mike Rapoport , Suren Baghdasaryan , Michal Hocko , Kairui Song , Qi Zheng , Shakeel Butt , Barry Song , Axel Rasmussen , Yuanchu Xie , Wei Xu , Baoquan He , Baolin Wang , Brendan Jackman , Johannes Weiner , Zi Yan , Oscar Salvador , Greg Kroah-Hartman , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Danilo Krummrich , Jan Kiszka , Kieran Bingham , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-cxl@vger.kernel.org, driver-core@lists.linux.dev, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 11/12] fs/proc/page: clarify comment in get_max_dump_pfn() Message-ID: References: <20260909-b4-sparsemem_cleanups-v1-0-008fc8d579fe@kernel.org> <20260909-b4-sparsemem_cleanups-v1-11-008fc8d579fe@kernel.org> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20260909-b4-sparsemem_cleanups-v1-11-008fc8d579fe@kernel.org> On Wed, Sep 09, 2026 at 03:33:04PM +0200, David Hildenbrand (Arm) wrote: > pfn_to_online_page() will only succeed on some PFNs within the same > section, not necessarily all. Let's make that clearer. > > Signed-off-by: David Hildenbrand (Arm) Nit on comment below, but LGTM so: Acked-by: Lorenzo Stoakes (ARM) > --- > fs/proc/page.c | 7 +++---- > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/fs/proc/page.c b/fs/proc/page.c > index 260772b20bd99..6856ff3e3cf28 100644 > --- a/fs/proc/page.c > +++ b/fs/proc/page.c > @@ -31,10 +31,9 @@ static inline unsigned long get_max_dump_pfn(void) > { > #ifdef CONFIG_SPARSEMEM > /* > - * The memmap of early sections is completely populated and marked > - * online even if max_pfn does not fall on a section boundary - > - * pfn_to_online_page() will succeed on all pages. Allow inspecting > - * these memmaps. > + * If max_pfn does not fall on a section boundary, pfn_to_online_page() > + * can succeed on PFNs beyond max_pfn within the same section. Allow > + * inspecting these memmaps. 'Allow inspection of' these memmaps is clearer I think. But this odd turn of phrase existed before this change also :) > */ > return round_up(max_pfn, PAGES_PER_SECTION); > #else > > -- > 2.43.0 > -- Cheers, Lorenzo