[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190115134410.GC13216@infradead.org>
Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2019 05:44:10 -0800
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To: Anup Patel <anup@...infault.org>
Cc: Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...ive.com>,
Albert Ou <aou@...s.berkeley.edu>,
Anup Patel <anup.patel@....com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
Atish Patra <atish.patra@....com>,
Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>,
linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/5] RISC-V: Setup init_mm before parse_early_param()
On Mon, Jan 07, 2019 at 09:40:44PM +0530, Anup Patel wrote:
> From: Anup Patel <anup.patel@....com>
>
> We should setup init_mm before doing parse_early_param()
> in setup_arch() to be consistent with setup_arch() of
> other architectures such as x86, ARM, and ARM64.
>
> Signed-off-by: Anup Patel <anup.patel@....com>
Is there any good inherent reason why the order matters? Not that I
really care either way..
Powered by blists - more mailing lists