[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <7300dfe1-0c6a-ae2e-2c48-c885248ec263@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 13 Jul 2021 11:51:46 +0200
From: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
To: Mike Rapoport <rppt@...nel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Mike Rapoport <rppt@...ux.ibm.com>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] mm: remove pfn_valid_within() and
CONFIG_HOLES_IN_ZONE
On 13.07.21 10:00, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> From: Mike Rapoport <rppt@...ux.ibm.com>
>
> After recent changes in freeing of the unused parts of the memory map and
> rework of pfn_valid() in arm and arm64 there are no architectures that can
> have holes in the memory map within a pageblock and so nothing can enable
> CONFIG_HOLES_IN_ZONE which guards non trivial implementation of
> pfn_valid_within().
>
> With that, pfn_valid_within() is always hardwired to 1 and can be
> completely removed.
>
> Remove calls to pfn_valid_within() and CONFIG_HOLES_IN_ZONE.
>
> Signed-off-by: Mike Rapoport <rppt@...ux.ibm.com>
There is currently the discussion to increase MAX_ORDER, for example, to
cover 1GiB instead of 4MiB on x86-64. This would mean that we could
suddenly, again, have holes insides MAX_ORDER - 1 pages.
So I assume if we ever go down that path, we'll need something like this
again.
For now, this looks like the right thing to do
Acked-by: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
--
Thanks,
David / dhildenb
Powered by blists - more mailing lists