From: Nicolas Pitre <nicolas.pitre@linaro.org>
To: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>
Cc: Dave Martin <dave.martin@linaro.org>,
Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
Chanho Min <chanho.min@lge.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
Jongsung Kim <neidhard.kim@lge.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] [RESEND] arm: limit memblock base address for early_pte_alloc
Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2012 13:50:16 -0400 (EDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.02.1206281338170.31003@xanadu.home> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120628090827.GH19026@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>
On Thu, 28 Jun 2012, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> Err, I don't think you understand what's going on here.
>
> The sequence is:
>
> 1. setup the initial mappings so we can run the kernel in virtual space.
> 2. provide the memory areas to memblock
> 3. ask the platform to reserve whatever memory it wants from memblock
> [this means using memblock_reserve or arm_memblock_steal). The
> reserved memory is *not* expected to be mapped at this point, and is
> therefore inaccessible.
> 4. Setup the lowmem mappings.
I do understand that pretty well so far.
> And when we're setting up the lowmem mappings, we do *not* expect to
> create any non-section page mappings, which again means we have no reason
> to use the memblock allocator to obtain memory that we want to immediately
> use.
And why does this have to remain so?
> So I don't know where you're claim of being "fragile" is coming from.
It doesn't come from anything you've described so far. It comes from
those previous attempts at lifting this limitation. I think that my
proposal is much less fragile than the other ones.
> What is fragile is people wanting to use arm_memblock_steal() without
> following the rules for it I layed down.
What about enhancing your rules if the technical limitations they were
based on are lifted?
Nicolas
--
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:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-06-28 17:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-06-05 7:11 Minchan Kim
2012-06-08 13:58 ` Kim, Jong-Sung
2012-06-27 16:02 ` Dave Martin
2012-06-28 5:43 ` Kim, Jong-Sung
2012-06-28 6:25 ` Nicolas Pitre
2012-06-28 6:54 ` Kim, Jong-Sung
2012-06-27 19:18 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2012-06-28 6:08 ` Kim, Jong-Sung
2012-06-19 8:38 ` Minchan Kim
2012-06-27 16:12 ` Dave Martin
2012-06-28 4:33 ` Nicolas Pitre
2012-06-28 9:08 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2012-06-28 17:50 ` Nicolas Pitre [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=alpine.LFD.2.02.1206281338170.31003@xanadu.home \
--to=nicolas.pitre@linaro.org \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=chanho.min@lge.com \
--cc=dave.martin@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=linux@arm.linux.org.uk \
--cc=minchan@kernel.org \
--cc=neidhard.kim@lge.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox