[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20220523132852.GA8289@alpha.franken.de>
Date: Mon, 23 May 2022 15:28:52 +0200
From: Thomas Bogendoerfer <tsbogend@...ha.franken.de>
To: Tiezhu Yang <yangtiezhu@...ngson.cn>
Cc: Xuefeng Li <lixuefeng@...ngson.cn>, linux-mips@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] MIPS: Modify early_parse_mem()
On Mon, May 09, 2022 at 03:30:11PM +0800, Tiezhu Yang wrote:
>
>
> On 03/18/2022 11:05 PM, Tiezhu Yang wrote:
> > Tiezhu Yang (3):
> > MIPS: Return -EINVAL if mem parameter is empty in early_parse_mem()
> > MIPS: Return -EINVAL if mem parameter is invalid in early_parse_mem()
> > MIPS: Use memblock_add_node() in early_parse_mem() under CONFIG_NUMA
> >
> > arch/mips/kernel/setup.c | 35 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------
> > 1 file changed, 29 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> >
>
> Hi Thomas,
>
> Any comments? Are you OK with these changes?
first and last patch are ok with me. The second patch changes semantics
for mem=, which I don't want to change. Iirc the latest idea to solve
your problem was to use mem=XX@ syntax to limit detected memory, which
is the preferred way for me, too.
If you want I'll take patch 1 and 3 out of this series.
Thomas.
--
Crap can work. Given enough thrust pigs will fly, but it's not necessarily a
good idea. [ RFC1925, 2.3 ]
Powered by blists - more mailing lists