Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 16 May 2006 12:11:47 +1000 | From | Nick Piggin <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 5/6] Have ia64 use add_active_range() and free_area_init_nodes |
| |
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote:
> >Andy's page_zone(page) == page_zone(buddy) check is good, I think. > >Making alignment is a difficult problem, I think. It complecates many things. >We can avoid above check only when memory layout is ideal. > >BTW, How about following patch ? >I don't want to say "Oh, you have to re-compile your kernel with >CONFIG_UNALIGNED_ZONE on your new machine. you are unlucky." to users. >
No, this is a function of the architecture code, not the specific machine it is running on.
So if the architecture ensures alignment and no holes, then they don't need the overhead of CONFIG_UNALIGNED_ZONE or CONFIG_HOLES_IN_ZONE.
If they do not ensure correct alignment, then they must enable CONFIG_UNALIGNED_ZONE, even if there may be actual systems which do result in aligned zones. --
Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.yahoo.com
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |