[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20080605115235.6453.E1E9C6FF@jp.fujitsu.com>
Date: Thu, 05 Jun 2008 11:58:56 +0900
From: Yasunori Goto <y-goto@...fujitsu.com>
To: Johannes Weiner <hannes@...urebad.de>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Yinghai Lu <yhlu.kernel@...il.com>,
Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH -mm 11/14] bootmem: respect goal more likely
Hi.
> > I'd like to straggle more, but may be need more time,
> > because, IA64 doesn't have early_printk, and console is not enable
> > at here.....
>
> Hm, just to make sure: this is the patch that breaks booting, right? If
> you apply all patches in the series before this one, the machine boots
> fine?
Yes.
>
> Could you boot a working image with bootmem_debug in the command line?
> Perhaps seeing the usual bootmem usage on this box gives a hint what is
> broken.
Ok. I'll try it.
> > P.S.
> > I was very confused by local variable namimng in alloc_bootmem_core.
> > I suppose start, max, and end, should be named like
> > sidx, eidx, and midx. They are not pfn, but index of bitmap.
>
> Okay, I will make them more clear.
Thanks.
> > However, new_start and new_end should be named as new_start_offset and
> > new_end_offset. They are not index, but offset from start address of
> > the node.
>
> Yes, that too. I would also rename last_offset to last_eidx and
> last_success to last_sidx. What do you think?
Last_sidx is ok. But, last_offset seems to be used to manage some
allocated smaller chunks than one page. I'm not sure last_eidx is ok.
Bye.
--
Yasunori Goto
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists