Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Thu, 15 Mar 2018 19:21:10 +0100
From:   Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
To:     Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>
Cc:     Daniel Vacek <neelx@redhat.com>,
        linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
        open list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
        Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
        Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm.com>,
        Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>,
        Paul Burton <paul.burton@imgtec.com>,
        Pavel Tatashin <pasha.tatashin@oracle.com>,
        Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] Revert "mm/page_alloc: fix memmap_init_zone pageblock
 alignment"
Message-ID: <20180315182110.GR23100@dhcp22.suse.cz>
References: <20180314192937.12888-1-ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>
 <CACjP9X_A1VsprX20XfEi31XVrySkScZDJsxUTh3Lf_6xr70Mug@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAKv+Gu-NfXm5YLWXAPsf6zycPs7Ti9qPLQ7FvpOrjdPz5hEP7Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <CACjP9X_xjyvQD_b1XNAZi=vjX0wGUmQuGJN8HahBmXx55OUE6A@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAKv+Gu8aVr_u4o8QR2Nquo9it54nSbvPMj4vcZ+CQa3uoOakrA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CACjP9X_bKJNeSwbPURmJ8bwDZ5BW2ZrykhT-cNapzKjddeWStQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAKv+Gu8dvCRUnS5KxDWa4GP2vMPo9cUWVNybx+tGY_Y8T67Uvw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CACjP9X9w-zruS8uj6j+ZRc7EUZ80MAwbvWOh=gRJZu7gAqU7hg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAKv+Gu83VtB+ff6H88UMF9kiz5923U8tXhQoERdErYE4pQg94Q@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAKv+Gu83VtB+ff6H88UMF9kiz5923U8tXhQoERdErYE4pQg94Q@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Thu 15-03-18 15:48:47, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> On 15 March 2018 at 15:34, Daniel Vacek <neelx@redhat.com> wrote:
[...]
> > Hence I was asking what is the abstract meaning
> > of it. As I see two *way_different* implementations so I am not sure
> > how I should understand that.
> >
> 
> My interpretation is that it has a struct page associated with it, but
> it seems the semantics of pfn_valid() aren't well defined.

Well, pfn_valid says that a given pfn is backed by a real memory and it
has a valid struct page backing it.
-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs