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, 25 Jun 2019 09:29:15 +0200
From:   Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
To:     Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
Cc:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
        Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>,
        =?iso-8859-1?B?Suly9G1l?= Glisse <jglisse@redhat.com>,
        Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@mellanox.com>,
        Ben Skeggs <bskeggs@redhat.com>, linux-mm@kvack.org,
        nouveau@lists.freedesktop.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org,
        linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 18/22] mm: mark DEVICE_PUBLIC as broken
Message-ID: <20190625072915.GD30350@lst.de>
References: <20190613094326.24093-1-hch@lst.de> <20190613094326.24093-19-hch@lst.de> <20190620192648.GI12083@dhcp22.suse.cz>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20190620192648.GI12083@dhcp22.suse.cz>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Jun 20, 2019 at 09:26:48PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Thu 13-06-19 11:43:21, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > The code hasn't been used since it was added to the tree, and doesn't
> > appear to actually be usable.  Mark it as BROKEN until either a user
> > comes along or we finally give up on it.
> 
> I would go even further and simply remove all the DEVICE_PUBLIC code.

I looked into that as I now got the feedback twice.  It would
create a conflict with another tree cleaning things up around the
is_device_private defintion, but otherwise I'd be glad to just remove
it.

Jason, as this goes through your tree, do you mind the additional
conflict?