[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <70443d0a-51ea-6c44-5a99-784516aed68c@huawei.com>
Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2022 10:21:35 +0800
From: Kefeng Wang <wangkefeng.wang@...wei.com>
To: Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@...roup.eu>,
"linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org" <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>
CC: "akpm@...ux-foundation.org" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
"npiggin@...il.com" <npiggin@...il.com>,
"songyuanzheng@...wei.com" <songyuanzheng@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/2] Revert "powerpc: Set max_mapnr correctly"
On 2022/4/4 20:31, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> Kefeng Wang <wangkefeng.wang@...wei.com> writes:
>> On 2022/3/28 22:12, Christophe Leroy wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Le 26/03/2022 à 08:55, Kefeng Wang a écrit :
>>>> Hi maintainers,
>>>>
>>>> I saw the patches has been reviewed[1], could they be merged?
>>> Thinking about it once more, I think the patches should go in reverse
>>> order. Patch 2 should go first and patch 1 should go after.
>>>
>>> Otherwise, once patch 1 is applied and patch 2 is not applied yet,
>>> virt_addr_valid() doesn't work anymore.
>> Should I resend them or could the maintainer reverse order when merging
>> them?
> I'll reverse them. I've found some breakage in other code while testing
> this, so I'll fix that up first before merging these.
Thanks.
>
> In patch 2 you didn't say what hardware you hit this on, what CPU does
> your system have?
CPU e5500 from fsl,P5040DS.
>
> cheers
> .
Powered by blists - more mailing lists