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=-2.5 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 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 24808C3A5A2 for ; Tue, 10 Sep 2019 10:32:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 02A5820872 for ; Tue, 10 Sep 2019 10:32:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2393813AbfIJKcl (ORCPT ); Tue, 10 Sep 2019 06:32:41 -0400 Received: from mx2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:33772 "EHLO mx1.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726869AbfIJKck (ORCPT ); Tue, 10 Sep 2019 06:32:40 -0400 X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at test-mx.suse.de Received: from relay2.suse.de (unknown [195.135.220.254]) by mx1.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id D1B74ABED; Tue, 10 Sep 2019 10:32:39 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 10 Sep 2019 12:32:37 +0200 From: Oscar Salvador To: n-horiguchi@ah.jp.nec.com Cc: mhocko@kernel.org, mike.kravetz@oracle.com, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/10] Hwpoison soft-offline rework Message-ID: <20190910103233.GA14370@linux> References: <20190910103016.14290-1-osalvador@suse.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20190910103016.14290-1-osalvador@suse.de> User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Sep 10, 2019 at 12:30:06PM +0200, Oscar Salvador wrote: > > This patchset was based on Naoya's hwpoison rework [1], so thanks to him > for the initial work. > > This patchset aims to fix some issues laying in soft-offline handling, > but it also takes the chance and takes some further steps to perform > cleanups and some refactoring as well. Of course, this was meant to be a "RFC PATCH" and not a "PATCH", but fat-fingers... Sorry for the inconvenience. -- Oscar Salvador SUSE L3