Re: [Lhms-devel] Re: 150 nonlinear

["Mika Penttilä" <mika.penttila@kolumbus.fi>]

Dave Hansen wrote:

>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
>
>  
>
What do you consider as Dave M's nonlinear?

--Mika

--
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: <a href=mailto:"aart@kvack.org"> aart@kvack.org </a>