From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from psmtp.com (na3sys010amx176.postini.com [74.125.245.176]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with SMTP id C2E666B003A for ; Mon, 12 Aug 2013 17:12:54 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <52094FB9.1030508@zytor.com> Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2013 14:12:25 -0700 From: "H. Peter Anvin" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH part5 0/7] Arrange hotpluggable memory as ZONE_MOVABLE. References: <5208FBBC.2080304@zytor.com> <20130812152343.GK15892@htj.dyndns.org> <52090D7F.6060600@gmail.com> <20130812164650.GN15892@htj.dyndns.org> <52092811.3020105@gmail.com> <20130812202029.GB8288@mtj.dyndns.org> <3908561D78D1C84285E8C5FCA982C28F31CB74A1@ORSMSX106.amr.corp.intel.com> <20130812205456.GC8288@mtj.dyndns.org> <52094C30.7070204@zytor.com> <20130812210852.GD8288@mtj.dyndns.org> In-Reply-To: <20130812210852.GD8288@mtj.dyndns.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Tejun Heo Cc: Yinghai Lu , "Luck, Tony" , Tang Chen , Tang Chen , "Moore, Robert" , "Zheng, Lv" , "rjw@sisk.pl" , "lenb@kernel.org" , "tglx@linutronix.de" , "mingo@elte.hu" , "akpm@linux-foundation.org" , "trenn@suse.de" , "jiang.liu@huawei.com" , "wency@cn.fujitsu.com" , "laijs@cn.fujitsu.com" , "isimatu.yasuaki@jp.fujitsu.com" , "izumi.taku@jp.fujitsu.com" , "mgorman@suse.de" , "minchan@kernel.org" , "mina86@mina86.com" , "gong.chen@linux.intel.com" , "vasilis.liaskovitis@profitbricks.com" , "lwoodman@redhat.com" , "riel@redhat.com" , "jweiner@redhat.com" , "prarit@redhat.com" , "zhangyanfei@cn.fujitsu.com" , "yanghy@cn.fujitsu.com" , "x86@kernel.org" , "linux-doc@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-mm@kvack.org" , "linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org" On 08/12/2013 02:08 PM, Tejun Heo wrote: > On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 02:06:07PM -0700, Yinghai Lu wrote: >> "near kernel" is not very clear. when we have 64bit boot loader, >> kernel could be anywhere. If the kernel is near the end of first >> kernel, we could have chance to >> have near kernel on second node. >> >> should use BRK for safe if the buffer is not too big. need bootloader >> will have kernel run-time size range in same node ram. > > How would that make any difference? You're just expanding the size of > kernel image instead of reserving it around the image. It's exactly > the same thing. You're just less flexible if you do that with BRK. > What am I missing here? > The BRK is what we know is free. Beyond that point you need understanding of the memory map. -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