From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-ig0-f174.google.com (mail-ig0-f174.google.com [209.85.213.174]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 504206B0253 for ; Sat, 15 Aug 2015 11:28:36 -0400 (EDT) Received: by igui7 with SMTP id i7so29654088igu.0 for ; Sat, 15 Aug 2015 08:28:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-ig0-f176.google.com (mail-ig0-f176.google.com. [209.85.213.176]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id q143si6225234ioe.201.2015.08.15.08.28.35 for (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Sat, 15 Aug 2015 08:28:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: by igui7 with SMTP id i7so29653975igu.0 for ; Sat, 15 Aug 2015 08:28:35 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20150815090635.GF21033@lst.de> References: <20150813031253.36913.29580.stgit@otcpl-skl-sds-2.jf.intel.com> <20150813035028.36913.25267.stgit@otcpl-skl-sds-2.jf.intel.com> <20150815090635.GF21033@lst.de> Date: Sat, 15 Aug 2015 08:28:35 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 5/7] libnvdimm, e820: make CONFIG_X86_PMEM_LEGACY a tristate option From: Dan Williams Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Christoph Hellwig Cc: "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Boaz Harrosh , Rik van Riel , "linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org" , david , Ingo Molnar , Linux MM , Mel Gorman , Ross Zwisler , "torvalds@linux-foundation.org" On Sat, Aug 15, 2015 at 2:06 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 11:50:29PM -0400, Dan Williams wrote: >> Purely for ease of testing, with this in place we can run the unit test >> alongside any tests that depend on the memmap=ss!nn kernel parameter. >> The unit test mocking implementation requires that libnvdimm be a module >> and not built-in. >> >> A nice side effect is the implementation is a bit more generic as it no >> longer depends on . > > I really don't like this artifical split, and I also don't like how > your weird "unit tests" force even more ugliness on the kernel. Almost > reminds of the python projects spending more effort on getting their > class mockable than actually producing results.. Well, the minute you see a 'struct DeviceFactory' appear in the kernel source you can delete all the unit tests and come take away my keyboard. Until then can we please push probing platform resources to a device driver ->probe() method where it belongs? Also given the type-7 type-12 confusion I'm just waiting for some firmware to describe persistent memory with type-12 at the e820 level and expect an ACPI-NFIT to be able to sub-divide it. In that case you'd want to blacklist either 'nd_e820.ko' or 'nfit.ko' to resolve the conflict. I'm not grokking the argument against allowing this functionality to be modular. -- 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