From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Subject: Re: 150 nonlinear From: Dave Hansen In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain Message-Id: <1098815779.4861.26.camel@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2004 11:36:19 -0700 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Andy Whitcroft Cc: lhms , linux-mm List-ID: Hi Andy, I've been thinking about how we're going to merge up the code that uses Dave M's nonlinear with your new implementation. There are two problems that are being solved: having a sparse layout requiring splitting up mem_map (solved by discontigmem and your nonlinear), and supporting non-linear phys to virt relationships (Dave M's implentation which does the mem_map split as well). I think both Dave M. and I agree that your implementation is the way to go, mostly because it properly starts the separation of these two distinct problems. So, I propose the following: your code should be referred to as something like CONFIG_SPARSEMEM. The code supporting non-linear p::v retains the CONFIG_NONLINEAR name. Do you think your code is in a place where it's ready for wider testing on a few more architectures? In which case, would you like it held in the -mhp tree while it's waiting to get merged? -- Dave -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: aart@kvack.org