Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Mon, 28 Nov 2022 09:18:44 +0100
From:   Alexander Gordeev <agordeev@linux.ibm.com>
To:     Anshuman Khandual <anshuman.khandual@arm.com>
Cc:     linux-mm@kvack.org,
        Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@linux.ibm.com>,
        David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>,
        Heiko Carstens <hca@linux.ibm.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Gerald Schaefer <gerald.schaefer@linux.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] s390/mm: Use pmd_pgtable_page() helper in
 __gmap_segment_gaddr()
Message-ID: <Y4Ru5Cnz+yps7RST@li-4a3a4a4c-28e5-11b2-a85c-a8d192c6f089.ibm.com>
References: <20221125034502.1559986-1-anshuman.khandual@arm.com>
 <Y4IvaRNLmASfRJiZ@li-4a3a4a4c-28e5-11b2-a85c-a8d192c6f089.ibm.com>
 <d3bcb8e1-cbf0-e820-47cf-f455128c597a@arm.com>
 <Y4Rflp1Z48hp/OAb@li-4a3a4a4c-28e5-11b2-a85c-a8d192c6f089.ibm.com>
 <28b976dd-3d12-3f2c-9b70-a5423255943e@arm.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <28b976dd-3d12-3f2c-9b70-a5423255943e@arm.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Nov 28, 2022 at 01:13:45PM +0530, Anshuman Khandual wrote:
> >>>> index e9e387caffac..5ead9e997510 100644
> >>>> --- a/include/linux/mm.h
> >>>> +++ b/include/linux/mm.h
> >>>> @@ -2403,7 +2403,7 @@ static inline void pgtable_pte_page_dtor(struct page *page)
> >>>>  
> >>>>  #if USE_SPLIT_PMD_PTLOCKS
> >>>>  
> >>>> -static struct page *pmd_pgtable_page(pmd_t *pmd)
> >>>> +static inline struct page *pmd_pgtable_page(pmd_t *pmd)
> >>>>  {
> >>>>  	unsigned long mask = ~(PTRS_PER_PMD * sizeof(pmd_t) - 1);
> >>>>  	return virt_to_page((void *)((unsigned long) pmd & mask));
> >>>
> >>> This chunk does not appear to belong to this patch.
> >>
> >> Should not this helper be made a 'static inline' before using it else where ?
> > 
> > Probably yes, but it is not kvm s390-specific change.
> 
> Right, just that the s390 change here is the first instance where this helper
> is being used outside the header, hence kept them together.
> 
> > 
> > I guess, you wanted to make it together or as a follow-up to this one?
> > https://lore.kernel.org/all/20221124131641.1523772-1-anshuman.khandual@arm.com/
> > 
> Unless too much trouble, could we just keep it here as proposed.

For s390 part:

Acked-by: Alexander Gordeev <agordeev@linux.ibm.com>

Thanks!