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, 22 Oct 2019 10:26:11 +0200
From:   Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
To:     Oscar Salvador <osalvador@suse.de>
Cc:     n-horiguchi@ah.jp.nec.com, mike.kravetz@oracle.com,
        linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 10/16] mm,hwpoison: Rework soft offline for free
 pages
Message-ID: <20191022082611.GD9379@dhcp22.suse.cz>
References: <20191017142123.24245-1-osalvador@suse.de>
 <20191017142123.24245-11-osalvador@suse.de>
 <20191018120615.GM5017@dhcp22.suse.cz>
 <20191021125842.GA11330@linux>
 <20191021154158.GV9379@dhcp22.suse.cz>
 <20191022074615.GA19060@linux>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20191022074615.GA19060@linux>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Tue 22-10-19 09:46:20, Oscar Salvador wrote:
[...]
> So, opposite to hard-offline, in soft-offline we do not fiddle with pages
> unless we are sure the page is not reachable anymore by any means.

I have to say I do not follow. Is there any _real_ reason for
soft-offline to behave differenttly from MCE (hard-offline)?
-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs