lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2014]   [Jan]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH V3 2/2] mm/memblock: Add support for excluded memory areas
On Tuesday 14 January 2014 08:17 AM, Grygorii Strashko wrote:
> Hi Philipp,
>
> On 01/13/2014 03:03 PM, Philipp Hachtmann wrote:
>> Add a new memory state "nomap" to memblock. This can be used to truncate
>> the usable memory in the system without forgetting about what is really
>> installed.
>
>
> Sorry, but this solution looks a bit complex (and probably wrong - from design point of view))
> if you need just to fix memblock_start_of_DRAM()/memblock_end_of_DRAM() APIs.
>
> More over, other arches use at least below APIs:
> - memblock_is_region_memory() !!!
> - for_each_memblock(memory, reg) !!!
> - __next_mem_pfn_range() !!!
> - memblock_phys_mem_size()
> - memblock_mem_size()
> - memblock_start_of_DRAM()
> - memblock_end_of_DRAM()
> with assumption that "memory" regions array have been updated
> when mem block is stolen (no-mapped), as result this change may
> have unpredictable side effects :( if these new APIs
> will be re-used (for ARM arch, as example).
>
> You can take a look on how ARM is using arm_memblock_steal() -
> the stolen memory is not accounted any more.
>
I was also wondering instead of nomap state, the memblock_add/remove()
will do the same trick. arm_memblock_steal() wrapper does achieve
similar functionality of reserving the DRAM without mapping it into
the Linux. Why not just use the same idea ?

Regards,
Santosh




\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2014-01-14 18:41    [W:0.246 / U:0.328 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site