[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20120313.001842.1454669292182923878.davem@davemloft.net>
Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2012 00:18:42 -0700 (PDT)
From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To: apenwarr@...il.com
Cc: akpm@...ux-foundation.org, josh@...htriplett.org,
paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, mingo@...e.hu, a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl,
fdinitto@...hat.com, hannes@...xchg.org, olaf@...fle.de,
paul.gortmaker@...driver.com, tj@...nel.org, hpa@...ux.intel.com,
yinghai@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] Persist printk buffer across reboots.
From: Avery Pennarun <apenwarr@...il.com>
Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2012 03:14:21 -0400
> On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 2:50 AM, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> wrote:
>> The idea is that you call prom_retain() before you take a look at what
>> physical memory is available in the kernel, and the firmware takes
>> this physical chunk out of those available memory lists upon
>> prom_retain() success.
>
> This sounds like exactly the API I would have wanted, however:
>
> 1) It's only available in arch/sparc so I can't test my patch if I try
> to use it;
> 2) There's nobody that calls it so it might not work;
> 3) I don't understand the API so I'm not really confident that
> reserving memory this way will actually prevent it from being seen by
> the kernel.
>
> In short, I think I would screw it up.
I'm only saying that you should design your stuff such that an
architecture with such features could easily hook into it using this
kind facility.
--
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