Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Fri, 5 Nov 2021 17:23:11 +0000
From:   Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
To:     Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@intel.com>
Cc:     Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Prathu Baronia <prathubaronia2011@gmail.com>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, chintan.pandya@oneplus.com,
        Prathu Baronia <prathu.baronia@oneplus.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        "Peter Zijlstra (Intel)" <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/1] mm/highmem: Remove deprecated kmap_atomic
Message-ID: <YYVofyW3txoT9RLM@casper.infradead.org>
References: <20210204073255.20769-1-prathu.baronia@oneplus.com>
 <20210204073255.20769-2-prathu.baronia@oneplus.com>
 <20210211003307.GA3158182@iweiny-DESK2.sc.intel.com>
 <20210211155625.7f8dd5d53e19f88530ddf248@linux-foundation.org>
 <YYU2YSOGHJFIrzmm@casper.infradead.org>
 <YYVhHCJcm2DM2G9u@casper.infradead.org>
 <20211105165859.GA3538886@iweiny-DESK2.sc.intel.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20211105165859.GA3538886@iweiny-DESK2.sc.intel.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Nov 05, 2021 at 09:58:59AM -0700, Ira Weiny wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 05, 2021 at 04:51:40PM +0000, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > On Fri, Nov 05, 2021 at 01:50:37PM +0000, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > > On Thu, Feb 11, 2021 at 03:56:25PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > > On Wed, 10 Feb 2021 16:33:07 -0800 Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@intel.com> wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > > > Signed-off-by: Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@intel.com>
> > > > > 
> > > > > This already has my signed off by so I'm not going to 'review'.  With Prathu's
> > > > > testing information I hope this can land.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Andrew did you see this patch?
> > > > 
> > > > I did now ;)
> > > > 
> > > > Tossed onto the post-rc1 pile, thanks,
> > > 
> > > This patch seems to have slipped through the gaps for a couple of cycles
> > > now?  I found a missed spot in it for CONFIG_HIGHMEM:
> > 
> > Ugh, sorry, wrong version of the patch.
> 
> Check!  Yea this works for me...
> 
> I think this should to through as a separate patch because Prathu's has been
> soaking for some time.  No need to complicate it with this.

This isn't "complicating Prathu's patch".  This is "fixing up the bit
that Prathu missed with his patch".  zero_user_segments() should not
have different rules on HIGHMEM and non-HIGHMEM kernels.