Hi Erick,
On Mon, Dec 10, 2018 at 03:28:37AM -0500, Erick Cafferata wrote:
> The following commit introduced a regression on my system.
>
> 124049decbb121ec32742c94fb5d9d6bed8f24d8
> x86/e820: put !E820_TYPE_RAM regions into memblock.reserved
>
> and it was backported to stable, stopping the kernel to boot on my system since around 4.17.4.
> It was reverted on upstream a couple months ago.
> commit 2a5bda5a624d6471d25e953b9adba5182ab1b51f upstream
This commit seems not a correct pointer.
In mainline, commit 124049decbb was reverted by
commit 9fd61bc95130d4971568b89c9548b5e0a4e18e0e
Author: Masayoshi Mizuma <m.mizuma@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri Oct 26 15:10:24 2018 -0700
Revert "x86/e820: put !E820_TYPE_RAM regions into memblock.reserved"
and, the original problem was finally fixed by
commit 907ec5fca3dc38d37737de826f06f25b063aa08e
Author: Naoya Horiguchi <n-horiguchi@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri Oct 26 15:10:15 2018 -0700
mm: zero remaining unavailable struct pages
Patch series "mm: Fix for movable_node boot option", v3.
so I think both patches should be backported onto v4.17.z.
Thanks,
Naoya Horiguchi
>
> There are some other modifications to the file after that. However, at the very least, can
> the revert be backported?
>
> I think the original patch tries to fix a previous bug, so probably the latest commits fixed that
> one correctly and need to be backported as well.
>
