[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <AANLkTikMMMWcT5Uvv5+80yeGP-uYbW7awQsHL7A7NXmw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Jul 2010 07:47:26 +0900
From: Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@...il.com>
To: Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Russell King <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@...sung.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
linux-mm <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>,
Mel Gorman <mel@....ul.ie>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Tight check of pfn_valid on sparsemem - v4
Hi Christoph,
On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 1:40 AM, Christoph Lameter
<cl@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
> On Tue, 27 Jul 2010, Minchan Kim wrote:
>
>> This patch registers address of mem_section to memmap itself's page struct's
>> pg->private field. This means the page is used for memmap of the section.
>> Otherwise, the page is used for other purpose and memmap has a hole.
>
> What if page->private just happens to be the value of the page struct?
> Even if that is not possible today, someday someone may add new
> functionality to the kernel where page->pivage == page is used for some
> reason.
I agree.
>
> Checking for PG_reserved wont work?
Okay. It would be better to consider page point itself with PG_reserved.
I will reflect your opinion next version. :)
Thanks, Christoph.
--
Kind regards,
Minchan Kim
--
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