[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150507162032.GB6188@debian777.Home>
Date: Fri, 8 May 2015 00:20:32 +0800
From: Min-Hua Chen <orca.chen@...il.com>
To: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>
Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] arm: improve non-section-aligned low memory mapping
On Wed, May 06, 2015 at 11:32:49AM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 26, 2015 at 04:47:08PM +0800, Min-Hua Chen wrote:
> > @@ -1384,6 +1351,15 @@ static void __init map_lowmem(void)
> > create_mapping(&map);
> > }
> > }
> > +
> > + /*
> > + * Find the first section-aligned memblock and set
> > + * memblock_limit at it.
> > + */
> > + if (!section_memblock_limit && !(end & ~SECTION_MASK)) {
> > + section_memblock_limit = end;
> > + memblock_set_current_limit(section_memblock_limit);
> > + }
>
> I've suggested an alternative solution to this (which just means changing
> the alignment of the memblock limit to 2x SECTION_SIZE).
Sorry I do not understand your suggestion very well. Do you mean the
alignment check should be 2X SECTION_SIZE?
if (!section_memblock_limit && !(end & (2 * SECTION_SIZE - 1))) {
I found that this solution is based on the fact that the first memory block is
always SECTION_SIZE-aligned. So we do not have to check the
alignment of the first memblock:
if (!section_memblock_limit)) {
section_memblock_limit = end;
memblock_set_current_limit(section_memblock_limit);
}
> --
> FTTC broadband for 0.8mile line: currently at 10.5Mbps down 400kbps up
> according to speedtest.net.
--
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