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 1326E405CE for ; Wed, 20 Mar 2024 13:14:38 +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=1710940480; cv=none; b=t12LtSvbnI4kUIiA7GtNipcRP/6ceeb7Tt4mCfk6c3R/cecM9nPB+BCNGT1TAZ/c5MawcawKe3NyFrxN0ScREZwJ4RbDbqVFek1p5BJ9De6+IZdFb4g2v+hOccroJrt6doA/+6l+DIrwQmeB8/pnTPfiQvkmeZxhQZaEc5VPZug= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1710940480; c=relaxed/simple; bh=Hc8+DRycej1M3IkI1Y6rVDgHKShwuRUDYDmDgh5gpug=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=RhSqsudPdICsx6eu9khdcVJMTDbzAT31qjy8wbNxuPMeKl5HoAIrMgBeGDdB6Cj2mmiBcwOXAEyvr5ENFc8vixYCSH0DqS2xh1LRJcqaO63iXu8b1e9K9XXusMl6zkCm7QGjuiBzXJ87YlZkM7hGuG5V7WD0mCBA88+Y2fowuM4= 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=hq1PYN/d; 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="hq1PYN/d" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1710940478; 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=ey4AOs9r3AsCA3ihOFSnMBOT4qisnZYJ1SOYp7h6Xf8=; b=hq1PYN/dZ2W4H/xUNWcsmj0fHa3NrAT/cMkz8Rwpr5+c6IschHkDpeXWfijOQHkloY2+su kEuiGeZ1MXeaEGM2m7taFXsrRaVsGVE1LoC+O+oKzvF7QlaNeQOoRHOl9LGTzrUqCA6AVm JNDZX63u8FFkh10pfmj2993QfSNtVDQ= Received: from mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (mimecast-mx02.redhat.com [66.187.233.88]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-482-BG7UvSxVMe6KR0RfzBnoGg-1; Wed, 20 Mar 2024 09:14:32 -0400 X-MC-Unique: BG7UvSxVMe6KR0RfzBnoGg-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.rdu2.redhat.com [10.11.54.2]) (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 F0615868658; Wed, 20 Mar 2024 13:14:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (unknown [10.72.116.12]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1E69040C6DB7; Wed, 20 Mar 2024 13:14:29 +0000 (UTC) Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2024 21:14:00 +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 10.11.54.2 On 03/20/24 at 11:36am, Mike Rapoport wrote: > On Wed, Mar 20, 2024 at 03:52:52PM +0800, Baoquan He wrote: > > 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. > > I think it's better first to remove the usage of set_dma_reserve() in x86 > and then clean up the unused code. OK, firslty remove the only user, that sounds reasonable. Will change. Thanks.