[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4c361d62e0b77242fe4b8592c82c4d90@linux.dev>
Date: Sun, 25 Jun 2023 07:39:10 +0000
From: "Yajun Deng" <yajun.deng@...ux.dev>
To: "Mike Rapoport" <rppt@...nel.org>
Cc: akpm@...ux-foundation.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] memblock: Introduce memblock_reserve_node()
June 25, 2023 1:08 PM, "Mike Rapoport" <rppt@...nel.org> wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 24, 2023 at 10:46:22AM +0800, Yajun Deng wrote:
>
>> It only returns address now in memblock_find_in_range_node(), we can add a
>> parameter pointing to integer for node id of the range, which can be used
>> to pass the node id to the new reserve region.
>>
>> Introduce memblock_reserve_node() so that the node id can be passed to
>> the reserve region in memblock_alloc_range_nid().
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Yajun Deng <yajun.deng@...ux.dev>
>
> What problem does this patch solve?
>
If we set nid and flags in memblock_alloc_range_nid(), we may not need
memblock_set_node() in memmap_init_reserved_pages().
I tested this patch and delete memblock_set_node() in memmap_init_reserved_pages().
It works fine. I did not delete memblock_set_node() in this patch just in case.
> --
> Sincerely yours,
> Mike.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists