From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-pa0-f52.google.com (mail-pa0-f52.google.com [209.85.220.52]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BB9BA6B0038 for ; Mon, 16 Jun 2014 01:27:58 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-pa0-f52.google.com with SMTP id eu11so4115154pac.11 for ; Sun, 15 Jun 2014 22:27:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lgemrelse7q.lge.com (LGEMRELSE7Q.lge.com. [156.147.1.151]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id yc9si12372983pab.221.2014.06.15.22.27.56 for ; Sun, 15 Jun 2014 22:27:57 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2014 14:32:09 +0900 From: Joonsoo Kim Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 00/10] CMA: generalize CMA reserved area management code Message-ID: <20140616053209.GG23210@js1304-P5Q-DELUXE> References: <1402543307-29800-1-git-send-email-iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com> <87r42seyvg.fsf@linux.vnet.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87r42seyvg.fsf@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: "Aneesh Kumar K.V" Cc: Andrew Morton , Marek Szyprowski , Michal Nazarewicz , Minchan Kim , Russell King - ARM Linux , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Paolo Bonzini , Gleb Natapov , Alexander Graf , Benjamin Herrenschmidt , Paul Mackerras , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org, kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org On Sat, Jun 14, 2014 at 12:55:39PM +0530, Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote: > Joonsoo Kim writes: > > > Currently, there are two users on CMA functionality, one is the DMA > > subsystem and the other is the kvm on powerpc. They have their own code > > to manage CMA reserved area even if they looks really similar. > > From my guess, it is caused by some needs on bitmap management. Kvm side > > wants to maintain bitmap not for 1 page, but for more size. Eventually it > > use bitmap where one bit represents 64 pages. > > > > When I implement CMA related patches, I should change those two places > > to apply my change and it seem to be painful to me. I want to change > > this situation and reduce future code management overhead through > > this patch. > > > > This change could also help developer who want to use CMA in their > > new feature development, since they can use CMA easily without > > copying & pasting this reserved area management code. > > > > v2: > > Although this patchset looks very different with v1, the end result, > > that is, mm/cma.c is same with v1's one. So I carry Ack to patch 6-7. > > > > Patch 1-5 prepare some features to cover ppc kvm's requirements. > > Patch 6-7 generalize CMA reserved area management code and change users > > to use it. > > Patch 8-10 clean-up minor things. > > > I wanted to test the ppc changes and found that the patch series doesn't apply > against v3.15 . Do you have a kernel tree which I can clone to test this > series ? This is based on linux-next -next-20140610. And my tree is on following link. https://github.com/JoonsooKim/linux/tree/cma-general-v2.0-next-20140610 But, I think I'm late, because you have already added a Tested-by tag. Thanks. -- 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: email@kvack.org