Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-145233-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 139.178.88.99 as permitted sender) client-ip=139.178.88.99;
Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2024 15:14:59 +0200
From: Alexander Gordeev <agordeev@linux.ibm.com>
To: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-mm@kvack.org, Janosch Frank <frankja@linux.ibm.com>,
        Claudio Imbrenda <imbrenda@linux.ibm.com>,
        Heiko Carstens <hca@linux.ibm.com>, Vasily Gorbik <gor@linux.ibm.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com>, Sven Schnelle <svens@linux.ibm.com>,
        Gerald Schaefer <gerald.schaefer@linux.ibm.com>,
        Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-s390@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] s390/mm: re-enable the shared zeropage for !PV
 and !skeys KVM guests
Message-ID: <Zh0oUwOqQaUxqqOt@li-008a6a4c-3549-11b2-a85c-c5cc2836eea2.ibm.com>
References: <20240411161441.910170-1-david@redhat.com>
 <20240411161441.910170-3-david@redhat.com>
 <ZhgRxB9qxz90tAwy@li-008a6a4c-3549-11b2-a85c-c5cc2836eea2.ibm.com>
 <bd4d940e-5710-446f-9dc5-928e67920ec6@redhat.com>
 <2a4ce6bc-49cc-45b8-ba15-82eb330f409f@linux.ibm.com>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <2a4ce6bc-49cc-45b8-ba15-82eb330f409f@linux.ibm.com>

On Mon, Apr 15, 2024 at 01:49:15PM +0200, Christian Borntraeger wrote:

Hi Christian,

> > On 11.04.24 18:37, Alexander Gordeev wrote:
> > > On Thu, Apr 11, 2024 at 06:14:41PM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> > > David, Christian,
> > > > Tested-by: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@linux.ibm.com>
> > > Please, correct me if I am wrong, but (to my understanding) the
> > > Tested-by for v2 does not apply for this version of the patch?
> > I thought I'd removed it -- you're absolutely, this should be dropped. Hopefully Christian has time to retest.
> 
> So I can confirm that this patch does continue fix the qemu memory consumption for a guest doing managedsave/start.

I will re-add your Tested-by.

> A quick check of other aspects seems to be ok. We will have more coverage on the base functionality as soon as it hits next(via Andrew) as our daily CI will pick this up for lots of KVM tests.

As per the cover letter I will pull it via s390 tree:
"Based on s390/features. Andrew agreed that both patches can go via the
s390x tree."

Thanks!