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:   Tue, 7 May 2019 13:02:08 -0400
From:   Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
To:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc:     Alexander Duyck <alexander.duyck@gmail.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        stable <stable@vger.kernel.org>,
        Mikhail Zaslonko <zaslonko@linux.ibm.com>,
        Gerald Schaefer <gerald.schaefer@de.ibm.com>,
        Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>,
        Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>,
        Mikhail Gavrilov <mikhail.v.gavrilov@gmail.com>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>,
        Alexander Duyck <alexander.h.duyck@linux.intel.com>,
        Pasha Tatashin <Pavel.Tatashin@microsoft.com>,
        Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com>,
        Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Sasha Levin <alexander.levin@microsoft.com>,
        linux-mm <linux-mm@kvack.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH AUTOSEL 4.14 62/95] mm, memory_hotplug: initialize struct
 pages for the full memory section
Message-ID: <20190507170208.GF1747@sasha-vm>
References: <20190507053826.31622-1-sashal@kernel.org>
 <20190507053826.31622-62-sashal@kernel.org>
 <CAKgT0Uc8ywg8zrqyM9G+Ws==+yOfxbk6FOMHstO8qsizt8mqXA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAHk-=win03Q09XEpYmk51VTdoQJTitrr8ON9vgajrLxV8QHk2A@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAHk-=win03Q09XEpYmk51VTdoQJTitrr8ON9vgajrLxV8QHk2A@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, May 07, 2019 at 09:50:50AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>On Tue, May 7, 2019 at 9:31 AM Alexander Duyck
><alexander.duyck@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Wasn't this patch reverted in Linus's tree for causing a regression on
>> some platforms? If so I'm not sure we should pull this in as a
>> candidate for stable should we, or am I missing something?
>
>Good catch. It was reverted in commit 4aa9fc2a435a ("Revert "mm,
>memory_hotplug: initialize struct pages for the full memory
>section"").
>
>We ended up with efad4e475c31 ("mm, memory_hotplug:
>is_mem_section_removable do not pass the end of a zone") instead (and
>possibly others - this was just from looking for commit messages that
>mentioned that reverted commit).

I got it wrong then. I'll fix it up and get efad4e475c31 in instead.
Thanks!

--
Thanks,
Sasha