[v6 04/15] mm: discard memblock data later

[Michal Hocko]

On Fri 11-08-17 12:22:52, Pasha Tatashin wrote:
> >>I will address your comment, and send out a new patch. Should I send it out
> >>separately from the series or should I keep it inside?
> >
> >I would post it separatelly. It doesn't depend on the rest.
> 
> OK, I will post it separately. No it does not depend on the rest, but the
> reset depends on this. So, I am not sure how to enforce that this comes
> before the rest.

Andrew will take care of that. Just make it explicit that some of the
patch depends on an earlier work when reposting.
 
> >>Also, before I send out a new patch, I will need to root cause and resolve
> >>problem found by kernel test robot <fengguang.wu at intel.com>, and bisected
> >>down to this patch.
> >>
> >>[  156.659400] BUG: Bad page state in process swapper  pfn:03147
> >>[  156.660051] page:ffff88001ed8a1c0 count:0 mapcount:-127 mapping:
> >>(null) index:0x1
> >>[  156.660917] flags: 0x0()
> >>[  156.661198] raw: 0000000000000000 0000000000000000 0000000000000001
> >>00000000ffffff80
> >>[  156.662006] raw: ffff88001f4a8120 ffff88001ed85ce0 0000000000000000
> >>0000000000000000
> >>[  156.662811] page dumped because: nonzero mapcount
> >>[  156.663307] CPU: 0 PID: 1 Comm: swapper Not tainted
> >>4.13.0-rc3-00220-g1aad694 #1
> >>[  156.664077] Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996), BIOS
> >>1.9.3-20161025_171302-gandalf 04/01/2014
> >>[  156.665129] Call Trace:
> >>[  156.665422]  dump_stack+0x1e/0x20
> >>[  156.665802]  bad_page+0x122/0x148
> >
> >Was the report related with this patch?
> 
> Yes, they said that the problem was bisected down to this patch. Do you know
> if there is a way to submit a patch to this test robot?

You can ask them for re testing with an updated patch by replying to
their report. ANyway I fail to see how the change could lead to this
patch.
-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs