From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <48568A69.6040800@zytor.com> Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2008 08:44:41 -0700 From: "H. Peter Anvin" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH] kernel parameter vmalloc size fix References: <20080616042528.GA3003@darkstar.te-china.tietoenator.com> <20080616080131.GC25632@elte.hu> In-Reply-To: <20080616080131.GC25632@elte.hu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Ingo Molnar Cc: Dave Young , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, the arch/x86 maintainers List-ID: Ingo Molnar wrote: > > hm. Why dont we instead add the size of the hole to the > __VMALLOC_RESERVE value instead? There's nothing inherently bad about > using vmalloc=16m. The VM area hole is really a kernel-internal > abstraction that should not be visible in the usage of the parameter. > Well, the question is are we taking it away from RAM or away from vmalloc... there aren't really any other alternatives. -hpa -- 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