From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner+w=401wt.eu-S1758402AbZB1AXq@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1758402AbZB1AXq (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Fri, 27 Feb 2009 19:23:46 -0500
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753570AbZB1AXh
	(ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel-outgoing>);
	Fri, 27 Feb 2009 19:23:37 -0500
Received: from smtp1.linux-foundation.org ([140.211.169.13]:60342 "EHLO
	smtp1.linux-foundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK)
	by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753408AbZB1AXh (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Fri, 27 Feb 2009 19:23:37 -0500
Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2009 16:22:49 -0800
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Gary Hade <garyhade@us.ibm.com>
Cc: garyhade@us.ibm.com, roel.kluin@gmail.com, mingo@elte.hu,
       linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, y-goto@jp.fujitsu.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: get_nid_for_pfn() returns int
Message-Id: <20090227162249.bcd0813a.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
In-Reply-To: <20090228001400.GC7174@us.ibm.com>
References: <4973AEEC.70504@gmail.com>
	<20090119175919.GA7476@us.ibm.com>
	<20090126223350.610b0283.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
	<20090127210727.GA9592@us.ibm.com>
	<25e057c00902270656x1781d04er5703058e47df455f@mail.gmail.com>
	<20090227213340.GB7174@us.ibm.com>
	<20090227134616.982fb73a.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
	<20090228001400.GC7174@us.ibm.com>
X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 2.2.4 (GTK+ 2.8.20; i486-pc-linux-gnu)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Fri, 27 Feb 2009 16:14:00 -0800
Gary Hade <garyhade@us.ibm.com> wrote:

> On Fri, Feb 27, 2009 at 01:46:16PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
>
> > > It is still lingering in -mm:
> > > http://userweb.kernel.org/~akpm/mmotm/broken-out/mm-get_nid_for_pfn-returns-int.patch
> > > 
> > 
> > Should it unlinger?  I have it in the 2.6.30 pile.
> 
> Yes, that would be good. :)

What would be good?  Your answer is ambiguous.

> > Does it actually fix a demonstrable bug?  
> 
> I am not aware of anyone that has actually reproduced the
> problem.

What problem?

All I gave at present is

  From: Roel Kluin <roel.kluin@gmail.com>

  get_nid_for_pfn() returns int

  Signed-off-by: Roel Kluin <roel.kluin@gmail.com>
  Cc: Gary Hade <garyhade@us.ibm.com>

>  I do not believe that we have any systems where 
> it can be reproduced since it would require both
>   (1) a memory section with an uninitialized range of
>       pages and
>   (2) a memory remove event for that memory section.
> As far as I know, none of our systems have (1).  Yasunori Goto
> has a system with (1) but I am not sure if he can do (2).

Please send a new changelog for this patch.

If you believe this patch should be merged into 2.6.29 then please
explain why.  Please also consider whether it should be backported into
2.6.28.x and eariler.