All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Daniel Axtens <dja@axtens.net>
To: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu>,
	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>,
	Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>,
	Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>,
	Steven Price <steven.price@arm.com>,
	akpm@linux-foundation.org
Cc: linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, x86@kernel.org,
	linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/5] mm: pagewalk: Fix walk for hugepage tables
Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2021 08:43:38 +1000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <877dl3184l.fsf@dja-thinkpad.axtens.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <733408f48b1ed191f53518123ee6fc6d42287cc6.1618506910.git.christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu>

Hi Christophe,

> Pagewalk ignores hugepd entries and walk down the tables
> as if it was traditionnal entries, leading to crazy result.
>
> Add walk_hugepd_range() and use it to walk hugepage tables.
>
> Signed-off-by: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu>
> ---
>  mm/pagewalk.c | 54 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------
>  1 file changed, 48 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/pagewalk.c b/mm/pagewalk.c
> index e81640d9f177..410a9d8f7572 100644
> --- a/mm/pagewalk.c
> +++ b/mm/pagewalk.c
> @@ -58,6 +58,32 @@ static int walk_pte_range(pmd_t *pmd, unsigned long addr, unsigned long end,
>  	return err;
>  }
>  
> +static int walk_hugepd_range(hugepd_t *phpd, unsigned long addr,
> +			     unsigned long end, struct mm_walk *walk, int pdshift)
> +{
> +	int err = 0;
> +#ifdef CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_HUGEPD
> +	const struct mm_walk_ops *ops = walk->ops;
> +	int shift = hugepd_shift(*phpd);
> +	int page_size = 1 << shift;
> +
> +	if (addr & (page_size - 1))
> +		return 0;
> +
> +	for (;;) {
> +		pte_t *pte = hugepte_offset(*phpd, addr, pdshift);
> +
> +		err = ops->pte_entry(pte, addr, addr + page_size, walk);
> +		if (err)
> +			break;
> +		if (addr >= end - page_size)
> +			break;
> +		addr += page_size;
> +	}

Initially I thought this was a somewhat unintuitive way to structure
this loop, but I see it parallels the structure of walk_pte_range_inner,
so I think the consistency is worth it.

I notice the pte walking code potentially takes some locks: does this
code need to do that?

arch/powerpc/mm/hugetlbpage.c says that hugepds are protected by the
mm->page_table_lock, but I don't think we're taking it in this code.

> +#endif
> +	return err;
> +}
> +
>  static int walk_pmd_range(pud_t *pud, unsigned long addr, unsigned long end,
>  			  struct mm_walk *walk)
>  {
> @@ -108,7 +134,10 @@ static int walk_pmd_range(pud_t *pud, unsigned long addr, unsigned long end,
>  				goto again;
>  		}
>  
> -		err = walk_pte_range(pmd, addr, next, walk);
> +		if (is_hugepd(__hugepd(pmd_val(*pmd))))
> +			err = walk_hugepd_range((hugepd_t *)pmd, addr, next, walk, PMD_SHIFT);
> +		else
> +			err = walk_pte_range(pmd, addr, next, walk);
>  		if (err)
>  			break;
>  	} while (pmd++, addr = next, addr != end);
> @@ -157,7 +186,10 @@ static int walk_pud_range(p4d_t *p4d, unsigned long addr, unsigned long end,
>  		if (pud_none(*pud))
>  			goto again;
>  
> -		err = walk_pmd_range(pud, addr, next, walk);
> +		if (is_hugepd(__hugepd(pud_val(*pud))))
> +			err = walk_hugepd_range((hugepd_t *)pud, addr, next, walk, PUD_SHIFT);
> +		else
> +			err = walk_pmd_range(pud, addr, next, walk);

I'm a bit worried you might end up calling into walk_hugepd_range with
ops->pte_entry == NULL, and then jumping to 0.

static int walk_pud_range(p4d_t *p4d, unsigned long addr, unsigned long end,
			  struct mm_walk *walk)
{
...
        pud = pud_offset(p4d, addr);
	do {
                ...
                if ((!walk->vma && (pud_leaf(*pud) || !pud_present(*pud))) ||
		    walk->action == ACTION_CONTINUE ||
		    !(ops->pmd_entry || ops->pte_entry)) <<< THIS CHECK
			continue;
                ...
		if (is_hugepd(__hugepd(pud_val(*pud))))
			err = walk_hugepd_range((hugepd_t *)pud, addr, next, walk, PUD_SHIFT);
		else
			err = walk_pmd_range(pud, addr, next, walk);
		if (err)
			break;
	} while (pud++, addr = next, addr != end);

walk_pud_range will proceed if there is _either_ an ops->pmd_entry _or_
an ops->pte_entry, but walk_hugepd_range will call ops->pte_entry
unconditionally.

The same issue applies to walk_{p4d,pgd}_range...

Kind regards,
Daniel

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Daniel Axtens <dja@axtens.net>
To: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu>,
	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>,
	Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>,
	Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>,
	Steven Price <steven.price@arm.com>,
	akpm@linux-foundation.org
Cc: linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, x86@kernel.org,
	linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/5] mm: pagewalk: Fix walk for hugepage tables
Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2021 08:43:38 +1000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <877dl3184l.fsf@dja-thinkpad.axtens.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <733408f48b1ed191f53518123ee6fc6d42287cc6.1618506910.git.christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu>

Hi Christophe,

> Pagewalk ignores hugepd entries and walk down the tables
> as if it was traditionnal entries, leading to crazy result.
>
> Add walk_hugepd_range() and use it to walk hugepage tables.
>
> Signed-off-by: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu>
> ---
>  mm/pagewalk.c | 54 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------
>  1 file changed, 48 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/pagewalk.c b/mm/pagewalk.c
> index e81640d9f177..410a9d8f7572 100644
> --- a/mm/pagewalk.c
> +++ b/mm/pagewalk.c
> @@ -58,6 +58,32 @@ static int walk_pte_range(pmd_t *pmd, unsigned long addr, unsigned long end,
>  	return err;
>  }
>  
> +static int walk_hugepd_range(hugepd_t *phpd, unsigned long addr,
> +			     unsigned long end, struct mm_walk *walk, int pdshift)
> +{
> +	int err = 0;
> +#ifdef CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_HUGEPD
> +	const struct mm_walk_ops *ops = walk->ops;
> +	int shift = hugepd_shift(*phpd);
> +	int page_size = 1 << shift;
> +
> +	if (addr & (page_size - 1))
> +		return 0;
> +
> +	for (;;) {
> +		pte_t *pte = hugepte_offset(*phpd, addr, pdshift);
> +
> +		err = ops->pte_entry(pte, addr, addr + page_size, walk);
> +		if (err)
> +			break;
> +		if (addr >= end - page_size)
> +			break;
> +		addr += page_size;
> +	}

Initially I thought this was a somewhat unintuitive way to structure
this loop, but I see it parallels the structure of walk_pte_range_inner,
so I think the consistency is worth it.

I notice the pte walking code potentially takes some locks: does this
code need to do that?

arch/powerpc/mm/hugetlbpage.c says that hugepds are protected by the
mm->page_table_lock, but I don't think we're taking it in this code.

> +#endif
> +	return err;
> +}
> +
>  static int walk_pmd_range(pud_t *pud, unsigned long addr, unsigned long end,
>  			  struct mm_walk *walk)
>  {
> @@ -108,7 +134,10 @@ static int walk_pmd_range(pud_t *pud, unsigned long addr, unsigned long end,
>  				goto again;
>  		}
>  
> -		err = walk_pte_range(pmd, addr, next, walk);
> +		if (is_hugepd(__hugepd(pmd_val(*pmd))))
> +			err = walk_hugepd_range((hugepd_t *)pmd, addr, next, walk, PMD_SHIFT);
> +		else
> +			err = walk_pte_range(pmd, addr, next, walk);
>  		if (err)
>  			break;
>  	} while (pmd++, addr = next, addr != end);
> @@ -157,7 +186,10 @@ static int walk_pud_range(p4d_t *p4d, unsigned long addr, unsigned long end,
>  		if (pud_none(*pud))
>  			goto again;
>  
> -		err = walk_pmd_range(pud, addr, next, walk);
> +		if (is_hugepd(__hugepd(pud_val(*pud))))
> +			err = walk_hugepd_range((hugepd_t *)pud, addr, next, walk, PUD_SHIFT);
> +		else
> +			err = walk_pmd_range(pud, addr, next, walk);

I'm a bit worried you might end up calling into walk_hugepd_range with
ops->pte_entry == NULL, and then jumping to 0.

static int walk_pud_range(p4d_t *p4d, unsigned long addr, unsigned long end,
			  struct mm_walk *walk)
{
...
        pud = pud_offset(p4d, addr);
	do {
                ...
                if ((!walk->vma && (pud_leaf(*pud) || !pud_present(*pud))) ||
		    walk->action == ACTION_CONTINUE ||
		    !(ops->pmd_entry || ops->pte_entry)) <<< THIS CHECK
			continue;
                ...
		if (is_hugepd(__hugepd(pud_val(*pud))))
			err = walk_hugepd_range((hugepd_t *)pud, addr, next, walk, PUD_SHIFT);
		else
			err = walk_pmd_range(pud, addr, next, walk);
		if (err)
			break;
	} while (pud++, addr = next, addr != end);

walk_pud_range will proceed if there is _either_ an ops->pmd_entry _or_
an ops->pte_entry, but walk_hugepd_range will call ops->pte_entry
unconditionally.

The same issue applies to walk_{p4d,pgd}_range...

Kind regards,
Daniel

_______________________________________________
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: Daniel Axtens <dja@axtens.net>
To: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu>,
	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>,
	Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>,
	Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>,
	Steven Price <steven.price@arm.com>,
	akpm@linux-foundation.org
Cc: linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org,
	x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
	linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/5] mm: pagewalk: Fix walk for hugepage tables
Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2021 08:43:38 +1000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <877dl3184l.fsf@dja-thinkpad.axtens.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <733408f48b1ed191f53518123ee6fc6d42287cc6.1618506910.git.christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu>

Hi Christophe,

> Pagewalk ignores hugepd entries and walk down the tables
> as if it was traditionnal entries, leading to crazy result.
>
> Add walk_hugepd_range() and use it to walk hugepage tables.
>
> Signed-off-by: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu>
> ---
>  mm/pagewalk.c | 54 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------
>  1 file changed, 48 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/pagewalk.c b/mm/pagewalk.c
> index e81640d9f177..410a9d8f7572 100644
> --- a/mm/pagewalk.c
> +++ b/mm/pagewalk.c
> @@ -58,6 +58,32 @@ static int walk_pte_range(pmd_t *pmd, unsigned long addr, unsigned long end,
>  	return err;
>  }
>  
> +static int walk_hugepd_range(hugepd_t *phpd, unsigned long addr,
> +			     unsigned long end, struct mm_walk *walk, int pdshift)
> +{
> +	int err = 0;
> +#ifdef CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_HUGEPD
> +	const struct mm_walk_ops *ops = walk->ops;
> +	int shift = hugepd_shift(*phpd);
> +	int page_size = 1 << shift;
> +
> +	if (addr & (page_size - 1))
> +		return 0;
> +
> +	for (;;) {
> +		pte_t *pte = hugepte_offset(*phpd, addr, pdshift);
> +
> +		err = ops->pte_entry(pte, addr, addr + page_size, walk);
> +		if (err)
> +			break;
> +		if (addr >= end - page_size)
> +			break;
> +		addr += page_size;
> +	}

Initially I thought this was a somewhat unintuitive way to structure
this loop, but I see it parallels the structure of walk_pte_range_inner,
so I think the consistency is worth it.

I notice the pte walking code potentially takes some locks: does this
code need to do that?

arch/powerpc/mm/hugetlbpage.c says that hugepds are protected by the
mm->page_table_lock, but I don't think we're taking it in this code.

> +#endif
> +	return err;
> +}
> +
>  static int walk_pmd_range(pud_t *pud, unsigned long addr, unsigned long end,
>  			  struct mm_walk *walk)
>  {
> @@ -108,7 +134,10 @@ static int walk_pmd_range(pud_t *pud, unsigned long addr, unsigned long end,
>  				goto again;
>  		}
>  
> -		err = walk_pte_range(pmd, addr, next, walk);
> +		if (is_hugepd(__hugepd(pmd_val(*pmd))))
> +			err = walk_hugepd_range((hugepd_t *)pmd, addr, next, walk, PMD_SHIFT);
> +		else
> +			err = walk_pte_range(pmd, addr, next, walk);
>  		if (err)
>  			break;
>  	} while (pmd++, addr = next, addr != end);
> @@ -157,7 +186,10 @@ static int walk_pud_range(p4d_t *p4d, unsigned long addr, unsigned long end,
>  		if (pud_none(*pud))
>  			goto again;
>  
> -		err = walk_pmd_range(pud, addr, next, walk);
> +		if (is_hugepd(__hugepd(pud_val(*pud))))
> +			err = walk_hugepd_range((hugepd_t *)pud, addr, next, walk, PUD_SHIFT);
> +		else
> +			err = walk_pmd_range(pud, addr, next, walk);

I'm a bit worried you might end up calling into walk_hugepd_range with
ops->pte_entry == NULL, and then jumping to 0.

static int walk_pud_range(p4d_t *p4d, unsigned long addr, unsigned long end,
			  struct mm_walk *walk)
{
...
        pud = pud_offset(p4d, addr);
	do {
                ...
                if ((!walk->vma && (pud_leaf(*pud) || !pud_present(*pud))) ||
		    walk->action == ACTION_CONTINUE ||
		    !(ops->pmd_entry || ops->pte_entry)) <<< THIS CHECK
			continue;
                ...
		if (is_hugepd(__hugepd(pud_val(*pud))))
			err = walk_hugepd_range((hugepd_t *)pud, addr, next, walk, PUD_SHIFT);
		else
			err = walk_pmd_range(pud, addr, next, walk);
		if (err)
			break;
	} while (pud++, addr = next, addr != end);

walk_pud_range will proceed if there is _either_ an ops->pmd_entry _or_
an ops->pte_entry, but walk_hugepd_range will call ops->pte_entry
unconditionally.

The same issue applies to walk_{p4d,pgd}_range...

Kind regards,
Daniel

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Daniel Axtens <dja@axtens.net>
To: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu>,
	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>,
	Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>,
	Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>,
	Steven Price <steven.price@arm.com>,
	akpm@linux-foundation.org
Cc: linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, x86@kernel.org,
	linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/5] mm: pagewalk: Fix walk for hugepage tables
Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2021 08:43:38 +1000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <877dl3184l.fsf@dja-thinkpad.axtens.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <733408f48b1ed191f53518123ee6fc6d42287cc6.1618506910.git.christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu>

Hi Christophe,

> Pagewalk ignores hugepd entries and walk down the tables
> as if it was traditionnal entries, leading to crazy result.
>
> Add walk_hugepd_range() and use it to walk hugepage tables.
>
> Signed-off-by: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu>
> ---
>  mm/pagewalk.c | 54 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------
>  1 file changed, 48 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/pagewalk.c b/mm/pagewalk.c
> index e81640d9f177..410a9d8f7572 100644
> --- a/mm/pagewalk.c
> +++ b/mm/pagewalk.c
> @@ -58,6 +58,32 @@ static int walk_pte_range(pmd_t *pmd, unsigned long addr, unsigned long end,
>  	return err;
>  }
>  
> +static int walk_hugepd_range(hugepd_t *phpd, unsigned long addr,
> +			     unsigned long end, struct mm_walk *walk, int pdshift)
> +{
> +	int err = 0;
> +#ifdef CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_HUGEPD
> +	const struct mm_walk_ops *ops = walk->ops;
> +	int shift = hugepd_shift(*phpd);
> +	int page_size = 1 << shift;
> +
> +	if (addr & (page_size - 1))
> +		return 0;
> +
> +	for (;;) {
> +		pte_t *pte = hugepte_offset(*phpd, addr, pdshift);
> +
> +		err = ops->pte_entry(pte, addr, addr + page_size, walk);
> +		if (err)
> +			break;
> +		if (addr >= end - page_size)
> +			break;
> +		addr += page_size;
> +	}

Initially I thought this was a somewhat unintuitive way to structure
this loop, but I see it parallels the structure of walk_pte_range_inner,
so I think the consistency is worth it.

I notice the pte walking code potentially takes some locks: does this
code need to do that?

arch/powerpc/mm/hugetlbpage.c says that hugepds are protected by the
mm->page_table_lock, but I don't think we're taking it in this code.

> +#endif
> +	return err;
> +}
> +
>  static int walk_pmd_range(pud_t *pud, unsigned long addr, unsigned long end,
>  			  struct mm_walk *walk)
>  {
> @@ -108,7 +134,10 @@ static int walk_pmd_range(pud_t *pud, unsigned long addr, unsigned long end,
>  				goto again;
>  		}
>  
> -		err = walk_pte_range(pmd, addr, next, walk);
> +		if (is_hugepd(__hugepd(pmd_val(*pmd))))
> +			err = walk_hugepd_range((hugepd_t *)pmd, addr, next, walk, PMD_SHIFT);
> +		else
> +			err = walk_pte_range(pmd, addr, next, walk);
>  		if (err)
>  			break;
>  	} while (pmd++, addr = next, addr != end);
> @@ -157,7 +186,10 @@ static int walk_pud_range(p4d_t *p4d, unsigned long addr, unsigned long end,
>  		if (pud_none(*pud))
>  			goto again;
>  
> -		err = walk_pmd_range(pud, addr, next, walk);
> +		if (is_hugepd(__hugepd(pud_val(*pud))))
> +			err = walk_hugepd_range((hugepd_t *)pud, addr, next, walk, PUD_SHIFT);
> +		else
> +			err = walk_pmd_range(pud, addr, next, walk);

I'm a bit worried you might end up calling into walk_hugepd_range with
ops->pte_entry == NULL, and then jumping to 0.

static int walk_pud_range(p4d_t *p4d, unsigned long addr, unsigned long end,
			  struct mm_walk *walk)
{
...
        pud = pud_offset(p4d, addr);
	do {
                ...
                if ((!walk->vma && (pud_leaf(*pud) || !pud_present(*pud))) ||
		    walk->action == ACTION_CONTINUE ||
		    !(ops->pmd_entry || ops->pte_entry)) <<< THIS CHECK
			continue;
                ...
		if (is_hugepd(__hugepd(pud_val(*pud))))
			err = walk_hugepd_range((hugepd_t *)pud, addr, next, walk, PUD_SHIFT);
		else
			err = walk_pmd_range(pud, addr, next, walk);
		if (err)
			break;
	} while (pud++, addr = next, addr != end);

walk_pud_range will proceed if there is _either_ an ops->pmd_entry _or_
an ops->pte_entry, but walk_hugepd_range will call ops->pte_entry
unconditionally.

The same issue applies to walk_{p4d,pgd}_range...

Kind regards,
Daniel

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

  reply	other threads:[~2021-04-15 22:43 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 91+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-04-15 17:18 [PATCH v1 0/5] Convert powerpc to GENERIC_PTDUMP Christophe Leroy
2021-04-15 17:18 ` Christophe Leroy
2021-04-15 17:18 ` Christophe Leroy
2021-04-15 17:18 ` Christophe Leroy
2021-04-15 17:18 ` [PATCH v1 1/5] mm: pagewalk: Fix walk for hugepage tables Christophe Leroy
2021-04-15 17:18   ` Christophe Leroy
2021-04-15 17:18   ` Christophe Leroy
2021-04-15 17:18   ` Christophe Leroy
2021-04-15 22:43   ` Daniel Axtens [this message]
2021-04-15 22:43     ` Daniel Axtens
2021-04-15 22:43     ` Daniel Axtens
2021-04-15 22:43     ` Daniel Axtens
2021-04-16  5:48     ` Christophe Leroy
2021-04-16  5:48       ` Christophe Leroy
2021-04-16  5:48       ` Christophe Leroy
2021-04-16  5:48       ` Christophe Leroy
2021-04-15 17:18 ` [PATCH v1 2/5] mm: ptdump: Fix build failure Christophe Leroy
2021-04-15 17:18   ` Christophe Leroy
2021-04-15 17:18   ` Christophe Leroy
2021-04-15 17:18   ` Christophe Leroy
2021-04-15 17:18 ` [PATCH v1 3/5] mm: ptdump: Provide page size to notepage() Christophe Leroy
2021-04-15 17:18   ` Christophe Leroy
2021-04-15 17:18   ` Christophe Leroy
2021-04-15 17:18   ` Christophe Leroy
2021-04-15 23:12   ` Daniel Axtens
2021-04-15 23:12     ` Daniel Axtens
2021-04-15 23:12     ` Daniel Axtens
2021-04-15 23:12     ` Daniel Axtens
2021-04-16  5:19     ` Christophe Leroy
2021-04-16  5:19       ` Christophe Leroy
2021-04-16  5:19       ` Christophe Leroy
2021-04-16  5:19       ` Christophe Leroy
2021-04-16  9:28   ` Steven Price
2021-04-16  9:28     ` Steven Price
2021-04-16  9:28     ` Steven Price
2021-04-16  9:28     ` Steven Price
2021-04-16 10:38     ` Christophe Leroy
2021-04-16 10:38       ` Christophe Leroy
2021-04-16 10:38       ` Christophe Leroy
2021-04-16 10:38       ` Christophe Leroy
2021-04-16 10:51       ` Steven Price
2021-04-16 10:51         ` Steven Price
2021-04-16 10:51         ` Steven Price
2021-04-16 10:51         ` Steven Price
2021-04-16 11:08         ` Christophe Leroy
2021-04-16 11:08           ` Christophe Leroy
2021-04-16 11:08           ` Christophe Leroy
2021-04-16 11:08           ` Christophe Leroy
2021-04-16 13:00           ` Steven Price
2021-04-16 13:00             ` Steven Price
2021-04-16 13:00             ` Steven Price
2021-04-16 13:00             ` Steven Price
2021-04-16 14:40             ` Christophe Leroy
2021-04-16 14:40               ` Christophe Leroy
2021-04-16 14:40               ` Christophe Leroy
2021-04-16 14:40               ` Christophe Leroy
2021-04-16 15:04               ` Christophe Leroy
2021-04-16 15:04                 ` Christophe Leroy
2021-04-16 15:04                 ` Christophe Leroy
2021-04-16 15:15                 ` Christophe Leroy
2021-04-16 15:15                   ` Christophe Leroy
2021-04-16 15:15                   ` Christophe Leroy
2021-04-16 16:00                   ` Steven Price
2021-04-16 16:00                     ` Steven Price
2021-04-16 16:00                     ` Steven Price
2021-04-19 13:14         ` Christophe Leroy
2021-04-19 13:14           ` Christophe Leroy
2021-04-19 13:14           ` Christophe Leroy
2021-04-19 13:14           ` Christophe Leroy
2021-04-19 14:00           ` Steven Price
2021-04-19 14:00             ` Steven Price
2021-04-19 14:00             ` Steven Price
2021-04-19 14:00             ` Steven Price
2021-04-19 16:41             ` Christophe Leroy
2021-04-19 16:41               ` Christophe Leroy
2021-04-19 16:41               ` Christophe Leroy
2021-04-19 16:41               ` Christophe Leroy
2021-04-15 17:18 ` [PATCH v1 4/5] mm: ptdump: Support hugepd table entries Christophe Leroy
2021-04-15 17:18   ` Christophe Leroy
2021-04-15 17:18   ` Christophe Leroy
2021-04-15 17:18   ` Christophe Leroy
2021-04-15 23:29   ` Daniel Axtens
2021-04-15 23:29     ` Daniel Axtens
2021-04-15 23:29     ` Daniel Axtens
2021-04-16  5:25     ` Christophe Leroy
2021-04-16  5:25       ` Christophe Leroy
2021-04-16  5:25       ` Christophe Leroy
2021-04-15 17:18 ` [PATCH v1 5/5] powerpc/mm: Convert powerpc to GENERIC_PTDUMP Christophe Leroy
2021-04-15 17:18   ` Christophe Leroy
2021-04-15 17:18   ` Christophe Leroy
2021-04-15 17:18   ` Christophe Leroy

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=877dl3184l.fsf@dja-thinkpad.axtens.net \
    --to=dja@axtens.net \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
    --cc=christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu \
    --cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
    --cc=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
    --cc=paulus@samba.org \
    --cc=steven.price@arm.com \
    --cc=x86@kernel.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.