From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [112.213.38.117]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6C3D9C05027 for ; Thu, 26 Jan 2023 07:23:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: from boromir.ozlabs.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4P2XHv5V5vz3chL for ; Thu, 26 Jan 2023 18:23:39 +1100 (AEDT) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=arndb.de header.i=@arndb.de header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=fm2 header.b=GiLb/skM; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=fm3 header.b=i56wP0aR; dkim-atps=neutral Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; spf=pass (sender SPF authorized) smtp.mailfrom=arndb.de (client-ip=66.111.4.224; helo=new2-smtp.messagingengine.com; envelope-from=arnd@arndb.de; receiver=) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=arndb.de header.i=@arndb.de header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=fm2 header.b=GiLb/skM; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=fm3 header.b=i56wP0aR; dkim-atps=neutral Received: from new2-smtp.messagingengine.com (new2-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.224]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4P2XGm64KRz3cdw for ; Thu, 26 Jan 2023 18:22:40 +1100 (AEDT) Received: from compute6.internal (compute6.nyi.internal [10.202.2.47]) by mailnew.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 84E2258287B; Thu, 26 Jan 2023 02:22:36 -0500 (EST) Received: from imap51 ([10.202.2.101]) by compute6.internal (MEProxy); Thu, 26 Jan 2023 02:22:36 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=arndb.de; h=cc :cc:content-type:date:date:from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:reply-to:sender:subject :subject:to:to; s=fm2; t=1674717756; x=1674724956; bh=E33V4yTgr/ ebT73Eum3QUd1t2W82YQcLJ50MWaQWWA8=; b=GiLb/skMhyZcQ01dO+WmZTL0hL fZ2ikfEbw6M+0GfWoi9BCHFyTrzd/xw84UaBaAMBNbekfpfzAvn0+3OyIl7DpZIk AscfaN2jhi+H4+HQPHW6kdeYv0wuJbvXO+Nmf3robmrH9p5Eaz+pTFIh+gw7OUdr GHaCtnvyFflXRN840zxE0TueOxb7X1UKgvjA9BbNkN54rpLAR1FBHefwPtJLfO63 HU5voKjovLZNYSTASSTneRk9lhMeYYIxU5ah7ERIB1I+Tlqz6Sh6cL1quV9LIBsu LJGaa2P7uDg6V7dGWcg5+AdhatDXLV001yKTEzZw6AETD2Ctpr5noVgk6LyA== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:cc:content-type:date:date:feedback-id :feedback-id:from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to:message-id :mime-version:references:reply-to:sender:subject:subject:to:to :x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s= fm3; t=1674717756; x=1674724956; bh=E33V4yTgr/ebT73Eum3QUd1t2W82 YQcLJ50MWaQWWA8=; b=i56wP0aRGUynM8c34e7C84YjtNs5ESnKIS4Qk9sa0afa hZ6EA3tyzNwBZXGsbGt4dL3J7JuIzcSWHi3zNRP0iTUuzQE6/UwhR5FhRpLn/ouY xt6qq+vPBvkzpCHoSxo03igHd1P6lM5xa5cKrF0kUrwg7q2T50CTjxmrDjS0magc ZxGVHrCofyRHgqO1ckZj1XRFm2MlqCsUcWY5ZDdbx7SuYVnKPtd0L9F879LdS+aK Dn7zgQYu29nT9qh2c89O8Dw8mgobJhwQ28spFTbeCvY5iq0cHOI93ldlBxi2zZYx hCfhfAJXQq9sSPCh3KQtBHwxvY8+uaUayqJxJdu1iQ== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedvhedruddvfedguddtiecutefuodetggdotefrod ftvfcurfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfgh necuuegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmd enucfjughrpefofgggkfgjfhffhffvvefutgesthdtredtreertdenucfhrhhomhepfdet rhhnugcuuegvrhhgmhgrnhhnfdcuoegrrhhnugesrghrnhgusgdruggvqeenucggtffrrg htthgvrhhnpeffheeugeetiefhgeethfejgfdtuefggeejleehjeeutefhfeeggefhkedt keetffenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpe grrhhnugesrghrnhgusgdruggv X-ME-Proxy: Feedback-ID: i56a14606:Fastmail Received: by mailuser.nyi.internal (Postfix, from userid 501) id 7FEEBB60089; Thu, 26 Jan 2023 02:22:34 -0500 (EST) X-Mailer: MessagingEngine.com Webmail Interface User-Agent: Cyrus-JMAP/3.9.0-alpha0-85-gd6d859e0cf-fm-20230116.001-gd6d859e0 Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <03605ec4-3e31-475e-8acf-2c342436aa24@app.fastmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20230125190757.22555-4-rppt@kernel.org> References: <20230125190757.22555-1-rppt@kernel.org> <20230125190757.22555-4-rppt@kernel.org> Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2023 08:22:15 +0100 From: "Arnd Bergmann" To: "Mike Rapoport" , "Andrew Morton" Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] mm, arch: add generic implementation of pfn_valid() for FLATMEM Content-Type: text/plain X-BeenThere: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Rich Felker , linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org, linux-sh@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org, linux-mips@vger.kernel.org, Max Filippov , guoren , sparclinux@vger.kernel.org, linux-hexagon@vger.kernel.org, WANG Xuerui , Greg Ungerer , Linux-Arch , Yoshinori Sato , Helge Deller , Huacai Chen , linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, Geert Uytterhoeven , Vineet Gupta , Matt Turner , linux-snps-arc@lists.infradead.org, linux--csky@vger.kernel.org, linux-xtensa@linux-xtensa.org, linux-um@lists.infradead.org, Richard Weinberger , linux-m68k@lists.linux-m68k.org, openrisc@lists.librecores.org, loongarch@lists.linux.dev, Stafford Horne , Brian Cain , Michal Simek , Thomas Bogendoerfer , linux-parisc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Dinh Nguyen , Palmer Dabbelt , linux-alpha@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, "David S . Miller" Errors-To: linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Sender: "Linuxppc-dev" On Wed, Jan 25, 2023, at 20:07, Mike Rapoport wrote: > From: "Mike Rapoport (IBM)" > > Every architecture that supports FLATMEM memory model defines its own > version of pfn_valid() that essentially compares a pfn to max_mapnr. > > Use mips/powerpc version implemented as static inline as a generic > implementation of pfn_valid() and drop its per-architecture definitions > > Signed-off-by: Mike Rapoport (IBM) Acked-by: Arnd Bergmann I assume this can best go through the mm tree, let me know if I should pick it up in the asm-generic tree instead. Arnd