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:   Wed, 6 Mar 2019 17:03:07 +0800
From:   Baoquan He <bhe@redhat.com>
To:     Kairui Song <kasong@redhat.com>
Cc:     Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>, Jiri Bohac <jbohac@suse.cz>,
        Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@gmail.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Omar Sandoval <osandov@fb.com>,
        Bhupesh Sharma <bhsharma@redhat.com>,
        Dave Young <dyoung@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] x86/gart/kcore: Exclude GART aperture from kcore
Message-ID: <20190306090307.GG14858@MiWiFi-R3L-srv>
References: <20190102105408.7124-1-kasong@redhat.com>
 <20190123141432.GA19177@MiWiFi-R3L-srv>
 <CACPcB9faut+9p8oJ_4nUv6ZnQ42=N4b9vqjCFtbyrs1K1SCWvg@mail.gmail.com>
 <20190124021744.GB19177@MiWiFi-R3L-srv>
 <CACPcB9cL_YfwORAhZEzz-C0QdVfXD6UrJ1Dc-eLQjDTJ8zP60A@mail.gmail.com>
 <CACPcB9e5+-3TrZ-nQc37-0nayU0RSMo-T4V+h4nEaHJ8Mqryqw@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CACPcB9e5+-3TrZ-nQc37-0nayU0RSMo-T4V+h4nEaHJ8Mqryqw@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On 03/06/19 at 04:48pm, Kairui Song wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 4:00 PM Kairui Song <kasong@redhat.com> wrote:
> Hi Baoquan, after second thought, vmcore and kcore are doing similar
> thing but still quite independent of each, didn't see any simple way
> to share the logic.
> And for the following naming issue I think considering the context
> there is no problem, "exclude_from_vmcore(aper_alloc, aper_order)" is
> clearly doing what it literally means, excluding the aperture from
> vmcore.
> 
> Let me know if anything is wrong, will send V4 later reuse this approach.

Thanks for the effort.

Yes, saw your v3. I kept quiet because I personally prefer the v2 method
which is similar to vmcore handling. So if you have investigated and
decided to do v2 way after deliberate thought, feel free to post v4. I
will make time to review.

Thanks
Baoquan