[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <50C44786.30509@cn.fujitsu.com>
Date: Sun, 09 Dec 2012 16:10:46 +0800
From: Tang Chen <tangchen@...fujitsu.com>
To: Jiang Liu <jiang.liu@...wei.com>
CC: Jiang Liu <liuj97@...il.com>, hpa@...or.com,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, rob@...dley.net,
isimatu.yasuaki@...fujitsu.com, laijs@...fujitsu.com,
wency@...fujitsu.com, linfeng@...fujitsu.com, yinghai@...nel.org,
kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com, minchan.kim@...il.com,
mgorman@...e.de, rientjes@...gle.com, rusty@...tcorp.com.au,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-doc@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/5] page_alloc: Make movablecore_map has higher priority
Hi Liu, Wu,
On 12/06/2012 10:26 AM, Jiang Liu wrote:
> On 2012-12-6 9:26, Tang Chen wrote:
>> On 12/05/2012 11:43 PM, Jiang Liu wrote:
>>> If we make "movablecore_map" take precedence over "movablecore/kernelcore",
>>> the logic could be simplified. I think it's not so attractive to support
>>> both "movablecore_map" and "movablecore/kernelcore" at the same time.
Thanks for the advice of removing movablecore/kernelcore. But since we
didn't plan to do this in the beginning, and movablecore/kernelcore are
more user friendly, I think for now, I'll handle DMA and low memory
address problems as you mentioned, and just keep movablecore/kernelcore
in the next version. :)
And about the SRAT, I think it is necessary to many users. I think we
should provide both interfaces. I may give a try in the next version.
Thanks. :)
--
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