[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <393b666b-3f28-439e-92e0-727c7bd529f3@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 9 May 2024 19:26:15 +0200
From: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
To: Heiko Carstens <hca@...ux.ibm.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-s390@...r.kernel.org, Vasily Gorbik <gor@...ux.ibm.com>,
Alexander Gordeev <agordeev@...ux.ibm.com>,
Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ux.ibm.com>,
Sven Schnelle <svens@...ux.ibm.com>, Janosch Frank <frankja@...ux.ibm.com>,
Claudio Imbrenda <imbrenda@...ux.ibm.com>,
Gerald Schaefer <gerald.schaefer@...ux.ibm.com>,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>, Thomas Huth <thuth@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 00/10] s390: PG_arch_1+folio cleanups for uv+hugetlb
On 09.05.24 17:04, Heiko Carstens wrote:
> On Wed, May 08, 2024 at 08:29:45PM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
>> Rebased on 390x/features. Cleanups around PG_arch_1 and folio handling
>> in UV and hugetlb code.
>>
>> One "easy" fix upfront. Another issue I spotted is documented in [1].
>>
>> Once this hits upstream, we can remove HAVE_ARCH_MAKE_PAGE_ACCESSIBLE
>> from core-mm and s390x, so only the folio variant will remain.
>>
>> Compile tested, but not runtime tested with UV, I'll appreciate some
>> testing help from people with UV access and experience.
>>
>> [1] https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20240404163642.1125529-1-david@redhat.com
>>
>> v2 -> v3:
>> * "s390/uv: split large folios in gmap_make_secure()"
>> -> Spelling fix
>> * "s390/hugetlb: convert PG_arch_1 code to work on folio->flags"
>> -> Extended patch description
>
> Added Claudio's Reviewed-by from v2 to the third patch, and fixed a
> typo in the commit message of patch 9.
Ah, I missed on RB, thanks!
--
Cheers,
David / dhildenb
Powered by blists - more mailing lists