[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <DM5PR0201MB35576550845B1682DC3F38E58E259@DM5PR0201MB3557.namprd02.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Tue, 25 May 2021 16:40:03 +0000
From: "Qian Cai (QUIC)" <quic_qiancai@...cinc.com>
To: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>,
Oscar Salvador <osalvador@...e.de>
CC: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Anshuman Khandual <anshuman.khandual@....com>,
Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>,
Linux Memory Management List <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: Arm64 crash while online/offline memory sections
> -----Original Message-----
> From: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, May 25, 2021 11:40 AM
> To: Qian Cai (QUIC) <quic_qiancai@...cinc.com>; Oscar Salvador
> <osalvador@...e.de>
> Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>; Anshuman Khandual
> <anshuman.khandual@....com>; Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>;
> Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>; Linux Memory Management List
> <linux-mm@...ck.org>; Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-
> kernel@...r.kernel.org>
> Subject: Re: Arm64 crash while online/offline memory sections
>
> On 25.05.21 17:36, Qian Cai (QUIC) wrote:
> > Reverting the patchset "Allocate memmap from hotadded memory (per
> device)" [1] from today's linux-next fixed a crash while online/offline
> memory sections.
>
> Do we know which patch in particular is problematic?
I don't know yet. It could be messy to dive into a patchset which usually has less clear boundaries, but I'll try to dig a bit more.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists