From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <owner-linux-mm@kvack.org>
Received: from mail-qk0-f197.google.com (mail-qk0-f197.google.com [209.85.220.197])
	by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EFE0A6B0022
	for <linux-mm@kvack.org>; Mon,  2 Apr 2018 07:25:47 -0400 (EDT)
Received: by mail-qk0-f197.google.com with SMTP id x188so10407484qkc.12
        for <linux-mm@kvack.org>; Mon, 02 Apr 2018 04:25:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-sor-f41.google.com (mail-sor-f41.google.com. [209.85.220.41])
        by mx.google.com with SMTPS id d184sor89193qka.47.2018.04.02.04.25.47
        for <linux-mm@kvack.org>
        (Google Transport Security);
        Mon, 02 Apr 2018 04:25:47 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20180401130607.GG13332@bombadil.infradead.org>
References: <CA+PpKPnOn9GLSfHUCNPSqLQUs0ySN_oCLDmBA_KG59iEpcS71Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <20180401130607.GG13332@bombadil.infradead.org>
From: Hao Lee <haolee.swjtu@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 2 Apr 2018 19:25:46 +0800
Message-ID: <CA+PpKPnytfV-ezyuMrSGAVre3NJXsQKHDPr6jLU+1EmB1v70WA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Why the kernel needs `split_mem_range` to split the physical
 address range?
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org
List-ID: <linux-mm.kvack.org>
To: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org

Hi, Matthew

Many thanks for your prompt reply. Your explanation is very clear and
easy to understand. It helps me a lot!

Regards,
Hao Lee