From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8DAE8C3F68F for ; Sun, 9 Feb 2020 13:45:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A5C52081E for ; Sun, 9 Feb 2020 13:45:19 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1581255919; bh=C5ZnmNinn7r93jfXQQ4TfyDFAbimGfnEEt98N+V1Ha0=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:List-ID:From; b=MC8Yy++23Bs3JOE7g/ZCzWdO2qGDWIXzN7hR9Ht9gos6TejJCtmy6Tq0zMaT7R6oL qRNTEwapj2lOMpY4Qbq6qd87SBo5Ikwi3O0sFp4WCBzK3mO+vi+2HihXMjWWPy+vLQ 0+cTKfnG6SEw9NG0q/HaYq+NieYL80ORa8tMEZgM= Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727795AbgBINpS (ORCPT ); Sun, 9 Feb 2020 08:45:18 -0500 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:57980 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727707AbgBINpS (ORCPT ); Sun, 9 Feb 2020 08:45:18 -0500 Received: from localhost (unknown [38.98.37.135]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 063CD20715; Sun, 9 Feb 2020 13:45:15 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1581255916; bh=C5ZnmNinn7r93jfXQQ4TfyDFAbimGfnEEt98N+V1Ha0=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=X+u2XVMDfgfX6w+wlTW17cd22Cfj3m9/RZsEFAfnC++Obmj6K5wqxDZLjmv42onQX ri8uKC68GxM6pypoY9fPDLVZiNlJulSZYi6C3ZlrDzj920rwvn17VVrVr/l+vhLBil AzTsN5T6/83vPtRJEVcgJHUG8vjlzUFd6qhhlxnw= Date: Sun, 9 Feb 2020 13:41:20 +0100 From: Greg Kroah-Hartman To: Mike Rapoport Cc: Pavel Machek , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, stable@vger.kernel.org, Wentao Wang , Andrew Morton , Linus Torvalds , Sasha Levin Subject: Re: [PATCH 4.19 200/321] mm/page_alloc.c: deduplicate __memblock_free_early() and memblock_free() Message-ID: <20200209124120.GA1622852@kroah.com> References: <20191203223427.103571230@linuxfoundation.org> <20191203223437.527630884@linuxfoundation.org> <20191205115043.GA25107@duo.ucw.cz> <20191205131128.GA25566@linux.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20191205131128.GA25566@linux.ibm.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Dec 05, 2019 at 03:11:28PM +0200, Mike Rapoport wrote: > On Thu, Dec 05, 2019 at 12:50:43PM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote: > > Hi! > > On Tue 2019-12-03 23:34:26, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > > From: Wentao Wang > > > > > > [ Upstream commit d31cfe7bff9109476da92c245b56083e9b48d60a ] > > > > > > > @@ -1537,12 +1537,7 @@ void * __init memblock_virt_alloc_try_nid( > > > */ > > > void __init __memblock_free_early(phys_addr_t base, phys_addr_t size) > > > { > > > - phys_addr_t end = base + size - 1; > > > - > > > - memblock_dbg("%s: [%pa-%pa] %pF\n", > > > - __func__, &base, &end, (void *)_RET_IP_); > > > - kmemleak_free_part_phys(base, size); > > > - memblock_remove_range(&memblock.reserved, base, size); > > > + memblock_free(base, size); > > > } > > > > This makes the memblock_dbg() less useful: _RET_IP_ will now be one of > > __memblock_free_early(), not of the original caller. > > > > That may be okay, but I guess it should be mentioned in changelog, and > > I don't really see why it is queued for -stable. > > Not sure why this one was picked for -stable, but in upstream there is a > followup commit 4d72868c8f7c ("memblock: replace usage of > __memblock_free_early() with memblock_free()") that completely eliminates > __memblock_free_early(). IMHO it would make sense to either to take both or > to drop both. Ok, I'll try, but that commit does not apply cleanly to 5.0, so it might take a bit of time... thanks, greg k-h