Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 28 Nov 2012 11:33:24 -0800 | Subject | Re: [PATCH v8 12/46] x86, mm: use pfn_range_is_mapped() with CPA | From | Yinghai Lu <> |
| |
On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 9:06 AM, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com> wrote: > On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 07:38:49PM -0800, Yinghai Lu wrote: >> We are going to map ram only, so under max_low_pfn_mapped, >> between 4g and max_pfn_mapped does not mean mapped at all. > > I think I know what you are saying but I am having a hard > time parsing it. Is this what you mean? > > "We check to see if the PFNs are under max_low_pfn_mapped or > between 4G and max_pfn_mapped. If they are not: then we > map them." ?
No
--- We are going to map ram only in patch: x86, mm: Only direct map addresses that are marked as E820_RAM
so range under max_low_pfn_mapped, ranges between 4g and max_pfn_mapped could have holes in them and the holes will not be mapped.
Use pfn_range_is_mapped() to check if the range is mapped. ---
| |