Received: by 2002:ac0:a5a7:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id m36-v6csp1988733imm; Thu, 9 Aug 2018 05:36:47 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AA+uWPzv1C0RnoHNj+VkaXi+C2WNaowDFmY3AAzf5bZi71ULOn3ug52S2z+w/iUGnU55Rnk3yh3S X-Received: by 2002:a62:c00c:: with SMTP id x12-v6mr2242447pff.216.1533818207477; Thu, 09 Aug 2018 05:36:47 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1533818207; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=NDtPug3v9sdzIEF+Vkr9QS5dI1WmtfbEF7NVI7l8G0tzMPbUW6y64pnapf7uln2VqN 0A0p/909FVEDr6Gj6HiMj5gnfy0+VKHdZqSxkkhCSa338uzccO2TSN4cy9VAJXyWeVOL BQv4jRgbQttXQ0VTRXKD43u2PRv03V6Et3sh0xB5/feysvQPj8E0Wf4tNOMvxIrbtxRf J0P9rTEiGOQUW+qQ46Lz8zXHvVpWqp/zOpKULtW1sbFsXH/mz0Ua3ntPgzLIfOLIGKcY 9cg4ED5HgPwnkTiarqectHhsjOmvGPr2nY5DnZJni6X02JCBKiaORQxI0RoKKFGv583n ryag== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:message-id:user-agent:in-reply-to :content-disposition:mime-version:references:subject:cc:to:from:date :arc-authentication-results; bh=Gi+7/3b41jP27tw4a8AzWwxNSHHK/sn2G3yrM7mX7v8=; b=SgwooaQ65JFDVhCY10wKGJuJY348bkNYhP5JFqesK+9p3PZoNLNvLgpa0nlUvV5r4c /4TRGhPEeDjL8EqSWFJ9Wig+I6bMv5LbRBgNLS2EGJE19ijgasPeJE7JcJyOP7Qg7YBl ac2935+5YP2DODp2Lm6K+te8oYXvvfsNyVN/tnPRd6ybfzHAxmM90zf/EYGDRef8vqhW 2eUii58w/htmnpUCfDm2JazFrJPbjOF1E885fUE336exQvPr7i1dOXq1328lQdcJ/sRQ M1qaxODjExed0aVnZJOHlBfk7RFxjvBr6RI4dWt/BNPjCXIGkKNPOZzmzFkHq3pAnbl0 8SIA== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=ibm.com Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id ca2-v6si6295362plb.305.2018.08.09.05.36.32; Thu, 09 Aug 2018 05:36:47 -0700 (PDT) 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; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=ibm.com Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1732162AbeHIO7e (ORCPT + 99 others); Thu, 9 Aug 2018 10:59:34 -0400 Received: from mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com ([148.163.156.1]:46702 "EHLO mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1731130AbeHIO7e (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 Aug 2018 10:59:34 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (m0098399.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.22/8.16.0.22) with SMTP id w79CTdx4136457 for ; Thu, 9 Aug 2018 08:34:52 -0400 Received: from e06smtp04.uk.ibm.com (e06smtp04.uk.ibm.com [195.75.94.100]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 2krnme89th-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Thu, 09 Aug 2018 08:34:51 -0400 Received: from localhost by e06smtp04.uk.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Thu, 9 Aug 2018 13:34:49 +0100 Received: from b06cxnps4074.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (9.149.109.196) by e06smtp04.uk.ibm.com (192.168.101.134) with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted; (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256/256) Thu, 9 Aug 2018 13:34:45 +0100 Received: from d06av24.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06av24.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.105.60]) by b06cxnps4074.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id w79CYilk37748788 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=FAIL); Thu, 9 Aug 2018 12:34:44 GMT Received: from d06av24.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9DFDC42042; Thu, 9 Aug 2018 15:34:52 +0100 (BST) Received: from d06av24.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF9AE4203F; Thu, 9 Aug 2018 15:34:51 +0100 (BST) Received: from rapoport-lnx (unknown [9.148.8.123]) by d06av24.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS; Thu, 9 Aug 2018 15:34:51 +0100 (BST) Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2018 15:34:42 +0300 From: Mike Rapoport To: Paul Burton Cc: "Fancer's opinion" , Linux-MIPS , Ralf Baechle , James Hogan , Huacai Chen , Michal Hocko , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel Subject: Re: [PATCH] mips: switch to NO_BOOTMEM References: <1531727262-11520-1-git-send-email-rppt@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20180726070355.GD8477@rapoport-lnx> <20180726172005.pgjmkvwz2lpflpor@pburton-laptop> <20180802115550.GA10232@rapoport-lnx> <20180808214215.bf6hyurv3nunfynd@pburton-laptop> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20180808214215.bf6hyurv3nunfynd@pburton-laptop> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 x-cbid: 18080912-0016-0000-0000-000001F4623B X-IBM-AV-DETECTION: SAVI=unused REMOTE=unused XFE=unused x-cbparentid: 18080912-0017-0000-0000-0000324A75BA Message-Id: <20180809123441.GA3264@rapoport-lnx> X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:,, definitions=2018-08-09_04:,, signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1015 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxscore=0 impostorscore=0 mlxlogscore=908 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1807170000 definitions=main-1808090131 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Aug 08, 2018 at 02:42:15PM -0700, Paul Burton wrote: > Hi Sergey & Mike, > > On Thu, Aug 09, 2018 at 12:30:03AM +0300, Fancer's opinion wrote: > > Hello Mike, > > I haven't read your patch text yet. I am waiting for the subsystem > > maintainers response at least > > about the necessity to have this type of changes being merged into the > > sources (I mean > > memblock/no-bootmem alteration). If they find it pointless (although I > > would strongly disagree), then > > nothing to discuss. Otherwise we can come up with a solution. > > > > -Sergey > > I'm all for dropping bootmem. > > It's too late for something this invasive in 4.19, but I'd love to get > it into 4.20. I can resend my patch once merge window is closed. We can then apply additional changes Sergey has done in his set on top. > Thanks, > Paul > -- Sincerely yours, Mike.