From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757253AbdDRQnC (ORCPT ); Tue, 18 Apr 2017 12:43:02 -0400 Received: from mail-wr0-f181.google.com ([209.85.128.181]:36147 "EHLO mail-wr0-f181.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753255AbdDRQnA (ORCPT ); Tue, 18 Apr 2017 12:43:00 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20170418071456.GD22360@dhcp22.suse.cz> References: <20170410110351.12215-1-mhocko@kernel.org> <20170411170317.GB21171@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20170418071456.GD22360@dhcp22.suse.cz> From: Dan Williams Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2017 09:42:57 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH -v2 0/9] mm: make movable onlining suck less To: Michal Hocko Cc: linux-mm , Andrew Morton , Mel Gorman , Vlastimil Babka , Andrea Arcangeli , Jerome Glisse , Reza Arbab , Yasuaki Ishimatsu , qiuxishi@huawei.com, Kani Toshimitsu , slaoub@gmail.com, Joonsoo Kim , Andi Kleen , David Rientjes , Daniel Kiper , Igor Mammedov , Vitaly Kuznetsov , LKML , Heiko Carstens , Lai Jiangshan , Martin Schwidefsky , Tobias Regnery Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 12:14 AM, Michal Hocko wrote: > On Mon 17-04-17 14:51:12, Dan Williams wrote: >> On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 10:03 AM, Michal Hocko wrote: >> > All the reported issue seem to be fixed and pushed to my git tree >> > attempts/rewrite-mem_hotplug branch. I will wait a day or two for more >> > feedback and then repost for the inclusion. I would really appreaciate >> > more testing/review! >> >> This still seems to be based on 4.10? It's missing some block-layer >> fixes and other things that trigger failures in the nvdimm unit tests. >> Can you rebase to a more recent 4.11-rc? > > OK, I will rebase on top of linux-next. This has been based on mmotm > tree so far. Btw. is there anything that would change the current > implementation other than small context tweaks? In other words, do you > see any issues with the current implementation regarding nvdimm's > ZONE_DEVICE usage? I don't foresee any issues, but I wanted to be able to run the latest test suite to be sure.