> Am 16.11.2019 um 01:08 schrieb Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>: > > On Thu, 7 Nov 2019 19:58:45 -0800 Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> On Thu, 7 Nov 2019 00:14:13 +0100 David Hildenbrand <david@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >>>> + /* >>>> + * Especially offline memory blocks might not be spanned by the >>>> + * node. They will get spanned by the node once they get onlined. >>>> + * However, they link to the node in sysfs and can get onlined later. >>>> + */ >>>> + rc = for_each_memory_block(&nid, check_no_memblock_for_node_cb); >>>> + if (rc) >>>> return; >>>> - } >>>> >>>> if (check_cpu_on_node(pgdat)) >>>> return; >>>> >>> >>> @Andrew, can you queued this one instead of v1 so we can give this some >>> more testing? Thanks! >> >> Sure. >> >> We have a tested-by but no reviewed-by or acked-by :( >> >> Null pointer derefs are unpopular. Should we cc:stable? > > <Crickets> > > I added cc:stable and shall send it upstream unreviewed. Yes, please cc:stable at as mentioned in the patch comments (below the description). Maybe we‘ll find somebody last minute to review ... thanks! >
