lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Apr]   [15]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: [patch 2/2] bootmem: Node-setup agnostic free_bootmem()
Date
Hi,

"Yinghai Lu" <yhlu.kernel@gmail.com> writes:

> On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 4:53 AM, Johannes Weiner <hannes@saeurebad.de> wrote:
>>
>> Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org> writes:
>>
>> > Andrew Morton wrote:
>> >> On Sun, 13 Apr 2008 18:56:57 +0200 Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> Johannes Weiner <hannes@saeurebad.de> writes:
>> >>>
>> >>>> Make free_bootmem() look up the node holding the specified address
>> >>>> range which lets it work transparently on single-node and multi-node
>> >>>> configurations.
>> >>> Acked-by: Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>
>> >>>
>> >>> This is far better than the original change it replaces and which
>> >>> I also objected to in review.
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >> So... do we think these two patches are sufficiently safe and important for
>> >> 2.6.25?
>> >
>> > It's only strictly needed for .26 I think for some (also slightly
>> > dubious) changes queued in git-x86.
>>
>> Does anything yet rely on this new free_bootmem() behaviour? If not,
>> the safest thing would be to just revert the original patch in mainline
>> and drop the second patch completely.
>
> 1. free_bootmem(ramdisk_image, ramdisk_size) in setup_arch of x86_64
> need that
> 2. another patch in x86.git need that.

Ok, to avoid confusion: we are talking about free_bootmem() iterating
over nodes and looking up an area WITHIN a node or free_bootmem()
freeing an area ACROSS nodes?

The first is what my patch does _only_.

Hannes


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2008-04-15 21:53    [W:0.059 / U:0.380 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site