All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
To: Mike Rapoport <rppt@kernel.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	devicetree <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>,
	iommu <iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org>,
	kasan-dev <kasan-dev@googlegroups.com>,
	KVM list <kvm@vger.kernel.org>,
	alpha <linux-alpha@vger.kernel.org>,
	Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
	linux-efi <linux-efi@vger.kernel.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"open list:BROADCOM NVRAM DRIVER" <linux-mips@vger.kernel.org>,
	Linux-MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
	linux-riscv <linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org>,
	linux-s390 <linux-s390@vger.kernel.org>,
	Linux-sh list <linux-sh@vger.kernel.org>,
	"open list:SYNOPSYS ARC ARCHITECTURE" 
	<linux-snps-arc@lists.infradead.org>,
	linux-um <linux-um@lists.infradead.org>,
	linux-usb@vger.kernel.org,
	linuxppc-dev <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>,
	linux-sparc <sparclinux@vger.kernel.org>,
	xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org,
	Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] memblock: cleanup memblock_free interface
Date: Thu, 23 Sep 2021 09:01:46 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAHk-=wiJB8H5pZz-AKaSJ7ViRtdxQGJT7eOByp8DJx2OwZSYwA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210923074335.12583-1-rppt@kernel.org>

On Thu, Sep 23, 2021 at 12:43 AM Mike Rapoport <rppt@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> The core change is in the third patch that makes memblock_free() a
> counterpart of memblock_alloc() and adds memblock_phys_alloc() to be a

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> counterpart of memblock_phys_alloc().

That should be 'memblock_phys_free()'

HOWEVER.

The real reason I'm replying is that this patch is horribly buggy, and
will cause subtle problems that are nasty to debug.

You need to be a LOT more careful.

From a trivial check - exactly because I looked at doing it with a
script, and decided it's not so easy - I found cases like this:

-               memblock_free(__pa(paca_ptrs) + new_ptrs_size,
+               memblock_free(paca_ptrs + new_ptrs_size,

which is COMPLETELY wrong.

Why? Because now that addition is done as _pointer_ addition, not as
an integer addition, and the end result is something completely
different.

pcac_ptrs is of type 'struct paca_struct **', so when you add
new_ptrs_size to it, it will add it in terms of that many pointers,
not that many bytes.

You need to use some smarter scripting, or some way to validate it.

And no, making the scripting just replace '__pa(x)' with '(void *)(x)'
- which _would_ be mindless and get the same result - is not
acceptable either, because it avoids one of the big improvements from
using the right interface, namely having compiler type checking (and
saner code that people understand).

So NAK. No broken automated scripting patches.

               Linus

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
To: Mike Rapoport <rppt@kernel.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	devicetree <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>,
	 iommu <iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org>,
	kasan-dev <kasan-dev@googlegroups.com>,
	 KVM list <kvm@vger.kernel.org>,
	alpha <linux-alpha@vger.kernel.org>,
	 Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
	 linux-efi <linux-efi@vger.kernel.org>,
	 Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	 "open list:BROADCOM NVRAM DRIVER" <linux-mips@vger.kernel.org>,
	Linux-MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
	 linux-riscv <linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org>,
	linux-s390 <linux-s390@vger.kernel.org>,
	 Linux-sh list <linux-sh@vger.kernel.org>,
	 "open list:SYNOPSYS ARC ARCHITECTURE"
	<linux-snps-arc@lists.infradead.org>,
	 linux-um <linux-um@lists.infradead.org>,
	linux-usb@vger.kernel.org,
	 linuxppc-dev <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>,
	linux-sparc <sparclinux@vger.kernel.org>,
	 xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org,
	Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] memblock: cleanup memblock_free interface
Date: Thu, 23 Sep 2021 09:01:46 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAHk-=wiJB8H5pZz-AKaSJ7ViRtdxQGJT7eOByp8DJx2OwZSYwA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210923074335.12583-1-rppt@kernel.org>

On Thu, Sep 23, 2021 at 12:43 AM Mike Rapoport <rppt@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> The core change is in the third patch that makes memblock_free() a
> counterpart of memblock_alloc() and adds memblock_phys_alloc() to be a

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> counterpart of memblock_phys_alloc().

That should be 'memblock_phys_free()'

HOWEVER.

The real reason I'm replying is that this patch is horribly buggy, and
will cause subtle problems that are nasty to debug.

You need to be a LOT more careful.

From a trivial check - exactly because I looked at doing it with a
script, and decided it's not so easy - I found cases like this:

-               memblock_free(__pa(paca_ptrs) + new_ptrs_size,
+               memblock_free(paca_ptrs + new_ptrs_size,

which is COMPLETELY wrong.

Why? Because now that addition is done as _pointer_ addition, not as
an integer addition, and the end result is something completely
different.

pcac_ptrs is of type 'struct paca_struct **', so when you add
new_ptrs_size to it, it will add it in terms of that many pointers,
not that many bytes.

You need to use some smarter scripting, or some way to validate it.

And no, making the scripting just replace '__pa(x)' with '(void *)(x)'
- which _would_ be mindless and get the same result - is not
acceptable either, because it avoids one of the big improvements from
using the right interface, namely having compiler type checking (and
saner code that people understand).

So NAK. No broken automated scripting patches.

               Linus

_______________________________________________
linux-snps-arc mailing list
linux-snps-arc@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-snps-arc

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
To: Mike Rapoport <rppt@kernel.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	devicetree <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>,
	 iommu <iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org>,
	kasan-dev <kasan-dev@googlegroups.com>,
	 KVM list <kvm@vger.kernel.org>,
	alpha <linux-alpha@vger.kernel.org>,
	 Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
	 linux-efi <linux-efi@vger.kernel.org>,
	 Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	 "open list:BROADCOM NVRAM DRIVER" <linux-mips@vger.kernel.org>,
	Linux-MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
	 linux-riscv <linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org>,
	linux-s390 <linux-s390@vger.kernel.org>,
	 Linux-sh list <linux-sh@vger.kernel.org>,
	 "open list:SYNOPSYS ARC ARCHITECTURE"
	<linux-snps-arc@lists.infradead.org>,
	 linux-um <linux-um@lists.infradead.org>,
	linux-usb@vger.kernel.org,
	 linuxppc-dev <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>,
	linux-sparc <sparclinux@vger.kernel.org>,
	 xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org,
	Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] memblock: cleanup memblock_free interface
Date: Thu, 23 Sep 2021 09:01:46 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAHk-=wiJB8H5pZz-AKaSJ7ViRtdxQGJT7eOByp8DJx2OwZSYwA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210923074335.12583-1-rppt@kernel.org>

On Thu, Sep 23, 2021 at 12:43 AM Mike Rapoport <rppt@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> The core change is in the third patch that makes memblock_free() a
> counterpart of memblock_alloc() and adds memblock_phys_alloc() to be a

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> counterpart of memblock_phys_alloc().

That should be 'memblock_phys_free()'

HOWEVER.

The real reason I'm replying is that this patch is horribly buggy, and
will cause subtle problems that are nasty to debug.

You need to be a LOT more careful.

From a trivial check - exactly because I looked at doing it with a
script, and decided it's not so easy - I found cases like this:

-               memblock_free(__pa(paca_ptrs) + new_ptrs_size,
+               memblock_free(paca_ptrs + new_ptrs_size,

which is COMPLETELY wrong.

Why? Because now that addition is done as _pointer_ addition, not as
an integer addition, and the end result is something completely
different.

pcac_ptrs is of type 'struct paca_struct **', so when you add
new_ptrs_size to it, it will add it in terms of that many pointers,
not that many bytes.

You need to use some smarter scripting, or some way to validate it.

And no, making the scripting just replace '__pa(x)' with '(void *)(x)'
- which _would_ be mindless and get the same result - is not
acceptable either, because it avoids one of the big improvements from
using the right interface, namely having compiler type checking (and
saner code that people understand).

So NAK. No broken automated scripting patches.

               Linus

_______________________________________________
linux-riscv mailing list
linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-riscv

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
To: Mike Rapoport <rppt@kernel.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	devicetree <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>,
	 iommu <iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org>,
	kasan-dev <kasan-dev@googlegroups.com>,
	 KVM list <kvm@vger.kernel.org>,
	alpha <linux-alpha@vger.kernel.org>,
	 Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
	 linux-efi <linux-efi@vger.kernel.org>,
	 Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	 "open list:BROADCOM NVRAM DRIVER" <linux-mips@vger.kernel.org>,
	Linux-MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
	 linux-riscv <linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org>,
	linux-s390 <linux-s390@vger.kernel.org>,
	 Linux-sh list <linux-sh@vger.kernel.org>,
	 "open list:SYNOPSYS ARC ARCHITECTURE"
	<linux-snps-arc@lists.infradead.org>,
	 linux-um <linux-um@lists.infradead.org>,
	linux-usb@vger.kernel.org,
	 linuxppc-dev <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>,
	linux-sparc <sparclinux@vger.kernel.org>,
	 xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org,
	Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] memblock: cleanup memblock_free interface
Date: Thu, 23 Sep 2021 09:01:46 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAHk-=wiJB8H5pZz-AKaSJ7ViRtdxQGJT7eOByp8DJx2OwZSYwA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210923074335.12583-1-rppt@kernel.org>

On Thu, Sep 23, 2021 at 12:43 AM Mike Rapoport <rppt@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> The core change is in the third patch that makes memblock_free() a
> counterpart of memblock_alloc() and adds memblock_phys_alloc() to be a

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> counterpart of memblock_phys_alloc().

That should be 'memblock_phys_free()'

HOWEVER.

The real reason I'm replying is that this patch is horribly buggy, and
will cause subtle problems that are nasty to debug.

You need to be a LOT more careful.

From a trivial check - exactly because I looked at doing it with a
script, and decided it's not so easy - I found cases like this:

-               memblock_free(__pa(paca_ptrs) + new_ptrs_size,
+               memblock_free(paca_ptrs + new_ptrs_size,

which is COMPLETELY wrong.

Why? Because now that addition is done as _pointer_ addition, not as
an integer addition, and the end result is something completely
different.

pcac_ptrs is of type 'struct paca_struct **', so when you add
new_ptrs_size to it, it will add it in terms of that many pointers,
not that many bytes.

You need to use some smarter scripting, or some way to validate it.

And no, making the scripting just replace '__pa(x)' with '(void *)(x)'
- which _would_ be mindless and get the same result - is not
acceptable either, because it avoids one of the big improvements from
using the right interface, namely having compiler type checking (and
saner code that people understand).

So NAK. No broken automated scripting patches.

               Linus

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
To: Mike Rapoport <rppt@kernel.org>
Cc: devicetree <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>,
	linux-efi <linux-efi@vger.kernel.org>,
	Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.ibm.com>,
	KVM list <kvm@vger.kernel.org>,
	linux-s390 <linux-s390@vger.kernel.org>,
	Linux-sh list <linux-sh@vger.kernel.org>,
	linux-um <linux-um@lists.infradead.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	kasan-dev <kasan-dev@googlegroups.com>,
	"open list:BROADCOM NVRAM DRIVER" <linux-mips@vger.kernel.org>,
	Linux-MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
	iommu <iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org>,
	linux-usb@vger.kernel.org, alpha <linux-alpha@vger.kernel.org>,
	linux-sparc <sparclinux@vger.kernel.org>,
	xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	"open list:SYNOPSYS ARC ARCHITECTURE"
	<linux-snps-arc@lists.infradead.org>,
	linuxppc-dev <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>,
	linux-riscv <linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org>,
	Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] memblock: cleanup memblock_free interface
Date: Thu, 23 Sep 2021 09:01:46 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAHk-=wiJB8H5pZz-AKaSJ7ViRtdxQGJT7eOByp8DJx2OwZSYwA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210923074335.12583-1-rppt@kernel.org>

On Thu, Sep 23, 2021 at 12:43 AM Mike Rapoport <rppt@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> The core change is in the third patch that makes memblock_free() a
> counterpart of memblock_alloc() and adds memblock_phys_alloc() to be a

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> counterpart of memblock_phys_alloc().

That should be 'memblock_phys_free()'

HOWEVER.

The real reason I'm replying is that this patch is horribly buggy, and
will cause subtle problems that are nasty to debug.

You need to be a LOT more careful.

From a trivial check - exactly because I looked at doing it with a
script, and decided it's not so easy - I found cases like this:

-               memblock_free(__pa(paca_ptrs) + new_ptrs_size,
+               memblock_free(paca_ptrs + new_ptrs_size,

which is COMPLETELY wrong.

Why? Because now that addition is done as _pointer_ addition, not as
an integer addition, and the end result is something completely
different.

pcac_ptrs is of type 'struct paca_struct **', so when you add
new_ptrs_size to it, it will add it in terms of that many pointers,
not that many bytes.

You need to use some smarter scripting, or some way to validate it.

And no, making the scripting just replace '__pa(x)' with '(void *)(x)'
- which _would_ be mindless and get the same result - is not
acceptable either, because it avoids one of the big improvements from
using the right interface, namely having compiler type checking (and
saner code that people understand).

So NAK. No broken automated scripting patches.

               Linus
_______________________________________________
iommu mailing list
iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/iommu

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
To: Mike Rapoport <rppt@kernel.org>
Cc: devicetree <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>,
	linux-efi <linux-efi@vger.kernel.org>,
	Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.ibm.com>,
	KVM list <kvm@vger.kernel.org>,
	linux-s390 <linux-s390@vger.kernel.org>,
	Linux-sh list <linux-sh@vger.kernel.org>,
	linux-um <linux-um@lists.infradead.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	kasan-dev <kasan-dev@googlegroups.com>,
	"open list:BROADCOM NVRAM DRIVER" <linux-mips@vger.kernel.org>,
	Linux-MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
	iommu <iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org>,
	linux-usb@vger.kernel.org, alpha <linux-alpha@vger.kernel.org>,
	linux-sparc <sparclinux@vger.kernel.org>,
	xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	"open list:SYNOPSYS ARC ARCHITECTURE"
	<linux-snps-arc@lists.infradead.org>,
	linuxppc-dev <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>,
	linux-riscv <linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org>,
	Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] memblock: cleanup memblock_free interface
Date: Thu, 23 Sep 2021 09:01:46 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAHk-=wiJB8H5pZz-AKaSJ7ViRtdxQGJT7eOByp8DJx2OwZSYwA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210923074335.12583-1-rppt@kernel.org>

On Thu, Sep 23, 2021 at 12:43 AM Mike Rapoport <rppt@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> The core change is in the third patch that makes memblock_free() a
> counterpart of memblock_alloc() and adds memblock_phys_alloc() to be a

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> counterpart of memblock_phys_alloc().

That should be 'memblock_phys_free()'

HOWEVER.

The real reason I'm replying is that this patch is horribly buggy, and
will cause subtle problems that are nasty to debug.

You need to be a LOT more careful.

From a trivial check - exactly because I looked at doing it with a
script, and decided it's not so easy - I found cases like this:

-               memblock_free(__pa(paca_ptrs) + new_ptrs_size,
+               memblock_free(paca_ptrs + new_ptrs_size,

which is COMPLETELY wrong.

Why? Because now that addition is done as _pointer_ addition, not as
an integer addition, and the end result is something completely
different.

pcac_ptrs is of type 'struct paca_struct **', so when you add
new_ptrs_size to it, it will add it in terms of that many pointers,
not that many bytes.

You need to use some smarter scripting, or some way to validate it.

And no, making the scripting just replace '__pa(x)' with '(void *)(x)'
- which _would_ be mindless and get the same result - is not
acceptable either, because it avoids one of the big improvements from
using the right interface, namely having compiler type checking (and
saner code that people understand).

So NAK. No broken automated scripting patches.

               Linus

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
To: Mike Rapoport <rppt@kernel.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	devicetree <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>,
	iommu <iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org>,
	kasan-dev <kasan-dev@googlegroups.com>,
	KVM list <kvm@vger.kernel.org>,
	alpha <linux-alpha@vger.kernel.org>,
	Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
	linux-efi <linux-efi@vger.kernel.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"open list:BROADCOM NVRAM DRIVER" <linux-mips@vger.kernel.org>,
	Linux-MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
	linux-riscv <linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org>,
	linux-s390 <linux-s390@vger.kernel.org>,
	Linux-sh list <linux-sh@vger.kernel.org>,
	"open list:SYNOPSYS ARC ARCHITECTURE"
	<linux-snps-arc@lists.infradead.org>,
	linux-um <linux-um@lists.infradead.org>,
	linux-usb@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] memblock: cleanup memblock_free interface
Date: Thu, 23 Sep 2021 09:01:46 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAHk-=wiJB8H5pZz-AKaSJ7ViRtdxQGJT7eOByp8DJx2OwZSYwA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210923074335.12583-1-rppt@kernel.org>

On Thu, Sep 23, 2021 at 12:43 AM Mike Rapoport <rppt@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> The core change is in the third patch that makes memblock_free() a
> counterpart of memblock_alloc() and adds memblock_phys_alloc() to be a

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> counterpart of memblock_phys_alloc().

That should be 'memblock_phys_free()'

HOWEVER.

The real reason I'm replying is that this patch is horribly buggy, and
will cause subtle problems that are nasty to debug.

You need to be a LOT more careful.

From a trivial check - exactly because I looked at doing it with a
script, and decided it's not so easy - I found cases like this:

-               memblock_free(__pa(paca_ptrs) + new_ptrs_size,
+               memblock_free(paca_ptrs + new_ptrs_size,

which is COMPLETELY wrong.

Why? Because now that addition is done as _pointer_ addition, not as
an integer addition, and the end result is something completely
different.

pcac_ptrs is of type 'struct paca_struct **', so when you add
new_ptrs_size to it, it will add it in terms of that many pointers,
not that many bytes.

You need to use some smarter scripting, or some way to validate it.

And no, making the scripting just replace '__pa(x)' with '(void *)(x)'
- which _would_ be mindless and get the same result - is not
acceptable either, because it avoids one of the big improvements from
using the right interface, namely having compiler type checking (and
saner code that people understand).

So NAK. No broken automated scripting patches.

               Linus

  parent reply	other threads:[~2021-09-23 16:02 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 95+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-09-23  7:43 [PATCH 0/3] memblock: cleanup memblock_free interface Mike Rapoport
2021-09-23  7:43 ` Mike Rapoport
2021-09-23  7:43 ` Mike Rapoport
2021-09-23  7:43 ` Mike Rapoport
2021-09-23  7:43 ` Mike Rapoport
2021-09-23  7:43 ` Mike Rapoport
2021-09-23  7:43 ` [PATCH 1/3] arch_numa: simplify numa_distance allocation Mike Rapoport
2021-09-23  7:43   ` Mike Rapoport
2021-09-23  7:43   ` Mike Rapoport
2021-09-23  7:43   ` Mike Rapoport
2021-09-23  7:43   ` Mike Rapoport
2021-09-23  7:43   ` Mike Rapoport
2021-09-23  7:43   ` Mike Rapoport
2021-09-23  7:43   ` Mike Rapoport
2021-09-23  7:43 ` [PATCH 2/3] xen/x86: free_p2m_page: use memblock_free_ptr() to free a virtual pointer Mike Rapoport
2021-09-23  7:43   ` Mike Rapoport
2021-09-23  7:43   ` Mike Rapoport
2021-09-23  7:43   ` Mike Rapoport
2021-09-23  7:43   ` Mike Rapoport
2021-09-23  7:43   ` Mike Rapoport
2021-09-23  7:43   ` Mike Rapoport
2021-09-23  7:43   ` Mike Rapoport
2021-09-23  8:10   ` Juergen Gross
2021-09-23  8:10     ` Juergen Gross
2021-09-23  8:10     ` Juergen Gross
2021-09-23  8:10     ` Juergen Gross
2021-09-23  8:10     ` Juergen Gross via iommu
2021-09-23  8:10     ` Juergen Gross
2021-09-23  7:43 ` [PATCH 3/3] memblock: cleanup memblock_free interface Mike Rapoport
2021-09-23  7:43   ` Mike Rapoport
2021-09-23  7:43   ` Mike Rapoport
2021-09-23  7:43   ` Mike Rapoport
2021-09-23  7:43   ` Mike Rapoport
2021-09-23  7:43   ` Mike Rapoport
2021-09-23  7:43   ` Mike Rapoport
2021-09-23  7:43   ` Mike Rapoport
2021-09-23  8:15   ` Juergen Gross
2021-09-23  8:15     ` Juergen Gross
2021-09-23  8:15     ` Juergen Gross
2021-09-23  8:15     ` Juergen Gross
2021-09-23  8:15     ` Juergen Gross
2021-09-23  8:15     ` Juergen Gross via iommu
2021-09-23  9:47   ` Christophe Leroy
2021-09-23  9:47     ` Christophe Leroy
2021-09-23  9:47     ` Christophe Leroy
2021-09-23  9:47     ` Christophe Leroy
2021-09-23  9:47     ` Christophe Leroy
2021-09-23  9:47     ` Christophe Leroy
2021-09-23 12:01     ` Mike Rapoport
2021-09-23 12:01       ` Mike Rapoport
2021-09-23 12:01       ` Mike Rapoport
2021-09-23 12:01       ` Mike Rapoport
2021-09-23 12:01       ` Mike Rapoport
2021-09-23 12:01       ` Mike Rapoport
2021-09-23 12:01       ` Mike Rapoport
2021-09-23 12:01       ` Mike Rapoport
2021-09-23 13:54       ` Christophe Leroy
2021-09-23 13:54         ` Christophe Leroy
2021-09-23 13:54         ` Christophe Leroy
2021-09-23 13:54         ` Christophe Leroy
2021-09-23 13:54         ` Christophe Leroy
2021-09-23 13:54         ` Christophe Leroy
2021-09-24  5:32         ` Mike Rapoport
2021-09-24  5:32           ` Mike Rapoport
2021-09-24  5:32           ` Mike Rapoport
2021-09-24  5:32           ` Mike Rapoport
2021-09-24  5:32           ` Mike Rapoport
2021-09-24  5:32           ` Mike Rapoport
2021-09-24  5:32           ` Mike Rapoport
2021-09-24  5:32           ` Mike Rapoport
2021-09-23 12:44   ` Shahab Vahedi
2021-09-23 12:44     ` Shahab Vahedi
2021-09-23 12:44     ` Shahab Vahedi
2021-09-23 12:44     ` Shahab Vahedi via iommu
2021-09-23 12:44     ` Shahab Vahedi
2021-09-23 12:44     ` Shahab Vahedi
2021-09-23 12:44     ` Shahab Vahedi
2021-09-23 12:44     ` Shahab Vahedi
2021-09-23 16:01 ` Linus Torvalds [this message]
2021-09-23 16:01   ` [PATCH 0/3] " Linus Torvalds
2021-09-23 16:01   ` Linus Torvalds
2021-09-23 16:01   ` Linus Torvalds
2021-09-23 16:01   ` Linus Torvalds
2021-09-23 16:01   ` Linus Torvalds
2021-09-23 16:01   ` Linus Torvalds
2021-09-23 16:01   ` Linus Torvalds
2021-09-23 19:45   ` Mike Rapoport
2021-09-23 19:45     ` Mike Rapoport
2021-09-23 19:45     ` Mike Rapoport
2021-09-23 19:45     ` Mike Rapoport
2021-09-23 19:45     ` Mike Rapoport
2021-09-23 19:45     ` Mike Rapoport
2021-09-23 19:45     ` Mike Rapoport
2021-09-23 19:45     ` Mike Rapoport
2021-09-23 19:45     ` Mike Rapoport

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to='CAHk-=wiJB8H5pZz-AKaSJ7ViRtdxQGJT7eOByp8DJx2OwZSYwA@mail.gmail.com' \
    --to=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=kasan-dev@googlegroups.com \
    --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-alpha@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-efi@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mips@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-sh@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-snps-arc@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-um@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-usb@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
    --cc=rppt@kernel.org \
    --cc=rppt@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=sparclinux@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.