[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1279054019.10995.18.camel@nimitz>
Date: Tue, 13 Jul 2010 13:46:59 -0700
From: Dave Hansen <dave@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>
Cc: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>,
Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@...il.com>,
Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Shaohua Li <shaohua.li@...el.com>,
Yakui Zhao <yakui.zhao@...el.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, kgene.kim@...sung.com,
Mel Gorman <mel@....ul.ie>
Subject: Re: [RFC] Tight check of pfn_valid on sparsemem
On Tue, 2010-07-13 at 19:39 +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 13, 2010 at 05:02:22PM +0900, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote:
> > How about stop using SPARSEMEM ? What's the benefit ? It just eats up
> > memory for mem_section[].
>
> The problem with that approach is that sometimes the mem_map array
> doesn't fit into any memory banks.
>
> We've gone around the loop of using flatmem with holes punched in it,
> to using discontigmem, and now to using sparsemem. It seems none of
> these solutions does what we need for ARM. I guess that's the price
> we pay for not having memory architected to be at any particular place
> in the physical memory map.
What's the ARM hardware's maximum addressable memory these days? 4GB?
A 4GB system would have 256 sections, which means 256*2*sizeof(unsigned
long) for the mem_section[]. That's a pretty small amount of RAM.
What sizes are the holes that are being punched these days? Smaller
than 16MB?
-- Dave
--
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