[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20141017132801.GH10873@e104818-lin.cambridge.arm.com>
Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2014 14:28:02 +0100
From: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>
To: Yifan Zhang <yifan.zhangm@...il.com>
Cc: Will Deacon <Will.Deacon@....com>,
Mark Rutland <Mark.Rutland@....com>,
"lauraa@...eaurora.org" <lauraa@...eaurora.org>,
"ganapatrao.kulkarni@...iumnetworks.com"
<ganapatrao.kulkarni@...iumnetworks.com>,
"robh@...nel.org" <robh@...nel.org>,
"leif.lindholm@...aro.org" <leif.lindholm@...aro.org>,
"Yalin.Wang@...ymobile.com" <Yalin.Wang@...ymobile.com>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Yifan Zhang <zhangyf@...vell.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] arm64: mm: use macro instead of if judgement of
ZONE_DMA
On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 04:08:43AM +0100, Yifan Zhang wrote:
> I found In current arm64 code, there is no normal zone, only DMA zone.
>
> Number of blocks type Unmovable Reclaimable Movable
> Reserve CMA Isolate
>
> Node 0, zone DMA 142 12 69
> 1 28 0
>
> When zone_sizes_init, zone_size[ZONE_NORMAL] is initialized to 0. (it
> is 3.10, I didn't try the latest code base)
[...]
> Is this ZONE_DMA cover full memory and ZONE_NORMAL = 0 strategy on
> purpose ? We will not use ZONE_NORMAL on arm64 ?
The normal zone is still there, only that it doesn't have any pages. The
page allocator falls back to the DMA zone, so you would not see any
problems with normal page allocation.
Are you trying to solve anything (performance?) or just what the kernel
shows as part of the normal zone?
--
Catalin
--
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