[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20180208121749.0ac09af2b5a143106f339f55@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2018 12:17:49 -0800
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Punit Agrawal <punit.agrawal@....com>
Cc: Naoya Horiguchi <n-horiguchi@...jp.nec.com>,
"linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>,
Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@...cle.com>,
"Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Anshuman Khandual <khandual@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
"linux-kernel\@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] mm: hwpoison: disable memory error handling on 1GB
hugepage
On Thu, 08 Feb 2018 12:30:45 +0000 Punit Agrawal <punit.agrawal@....com> wrote:
> >
> > So I don't think that the above test result means that errors are properly
> > handled, and the proposed patch should help for arm64.
>
> Although, the deviation of pud_huge() avoids a kernel crash the code
> would be easier to maintain and reason about if arm64 helpers are
> consistent with expectations by core code.
>
> I'll look to update the arm64 helpers once this patch gets merged. But
> it would be helpful if there was a clear expression of semantics for
> pud_huge() for various cases. Is there any version that can be used as
> reference?
Is that an ack or tested-by?
Mike keeps plaintively asking the powerpc developers to take a look,
but they remain steadfastly in hiding.
Folks, this patch fixes a BUG and is marked for -stable. Can we please
prioritize it?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists