From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.133.124]) (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 4B8E222313 for ; Wed, 20 Mar 2024 07:53:04 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=170.10.133.124 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1710921186; cv=none; b=uNYQNOpvo1xBp6A7ce8lFkvY4hF29BkTchqH+ImhmaaE+HZBurP+e+KzTOBBWaWGI80i7qYAguGiHFDS10JHVAkpJKyTgMPw5SHfj3FUfaTrWzdxJP6t19m5U5t5HNywslsrjL6XjTWZZM+WpZOHX/Gpjvj3lT/kuM3odHfVyj8= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1710921186; c=relaxed/simple; bh=iWv3UbxELsI0tthGfnSMTkPZqi9OTXEW5xAM+9p1v2w=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=getIXLcY+K5usiVjeKynhz/3MU5HpGiT03H+Vn27LMD2EEZ04EcwCAFXxalTY1Rn7i4QYtb2mUbIOBnLXohvED7nm/mcfYdSKe5vOO1w5fqc3BwWcFVsPatk4BumV4dSDwnt6IhskP+OtLSC1EQv71owHyIx9Ejv2Vdq6y7W9PU= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b=RikP5jal; arc=none smtp.client-ip=170.10.133.124 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b="RikP5jal" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1710921183; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=fqiMQHqORmeDjYjtn7CCiO+1Zj4Lkm+sgSbsT1labdI=; b=RikP5jalDf2CGsFKb/RjPHJz51yuXMyArv6csH6fishEwKctZMLxhvgQdlVOULUZgDn0uP M79no1xS7FecL/JM+ejbV2HgOq91u1KPm9XssVH0aBlwDu4ELW/w+p54zR7LPdbka1Xp+Q ZtY3tJcKM3GUfsgNs+H8OXliUPdfV+8= Received: from mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (mx-ext.redhat.com [66.187.233.73]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-518-IpUFOGt-N_aQBzw5f2DQIQ-1; Wed, 20 Mar 2024 03:53:00 -0400 X-MC-Unique: IpUFOGt-N_aQBzw5f2DQIQ-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx07.intmail.prod.int.rdu2.redhat.com [10.11.54.7]) (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 mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7BEF5383CD69; Wed, 20 Mar 2024 07:53:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (unknown [10.72.116.12]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BC8A91C060A6; Wed, 20 Mar 2024 07:52:59 +0000 (UTC) Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2024 15:52:52 +0800 From: Baoquan He To: Mike Rapoport Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/6] x86: remove memblock_find_dma_reserve() Message-ID: References: <20240318142138.783350-1-bhe@redhat.com> <20240318142138.783350-3-bhe@redhat.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@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: X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 3.4.1 on 10.11.54.7 On 03/19/24 at 05:49pm, Mike Rapoport wrote: > Hi Baoquan, > > On Mon, Mar 18, 2024 at 10:21:34PM +0800, Baoquan He wrote: > > This is not needed any more. > > I'd swap this and the first patch, so that the first patch would remove > memblock_find_dma_reserve() and it's changelog will explain why it's not > needed and then the second patch will simply drop unused set_dma_reserve() Thanks, Mike. My thought on the patch 1/2 splitting is: patch 1 is removing all relevant codes in mm, including the usage of dma_reserve in free_area_init_core() and exporting set_dma_reserve() to any ARCH which want to subtract the dma_reserve from DMA zone. Patch 2 purely remove the code in x86 ARCH about how to get dma_reserve. Your suggestion is also good to me, I can rearrange the order and repost.