On Fri, Feb 05, 2021 at 06:55:53PM +0000, Will Deacon wrote: > On Wed, Feb 03, 2021 at 09:20:39AM +0530, Anshuman Khandual wrote: > > On 2/2/21 6:26 PM, David Hildenbrand wrote: > > > On 02.02.21 13:51, Will Deacon wrote: > > >> On Tue, Feb 02, 2021 at 01:39:29PM +0100, David Hildenbrand wrote: > > >>> As I expressed already, long term we should really get rid of the arm64 > > >>> variant and rather special-case the generic one. Then we won't go out of > > >>> sync - just as it happened with ZONE_DEVICE handling here. > > >> > > >> Why does this have to be long term? This ZONE_DEVICE stuff could be the > > >> carrot on the stick :) > > > > > > Yes, I suggested to do it now, but Anshuman convinced me that doing a > > > simple fix upfront might be cleaner --- for example when it comes to > > > backporting :) > > > > Right. The current pfn_valid() breaks for ZONE_DEVICE memory and this fixes > > the problem in the present context which can be easily backported if required. > > > > Changing or rather overhauling the generic code with new configs as proposed > > earlier (which I am planning to work on subsequently) would definitely be an > > improvement for the current pfn_valid() situation in terms of maintainability > > but then it should not stop us from fixing the problem now. > > Alright, I've mulled this over a bit. I don't agree that this patch helps > with maintainability (quite the opposite, in fact), but perfection is the > enemy of the good so I'll queue the series for 5.12. However, I'll revert > the changes at the first sign of a problem, so please do work towards a > generic solution which can replace this in the medium term. ... and dropped. These patches appear to be responsible for a boot regression reported by CKI: https://lore.kernel.org/r/cki.8D1CB60FEC.K6NJMEFQPV@xxxxxxxxxx Will
