Re: [RFC PATCH] sparse_irq aka dyn_irq
- From: Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2008 01:55:11 -0800
On Mon, 10 Nov 2008 10:40:33 +0100 Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxx> wrote:
@@ -987,6 +988,8 @@ void __init mem_init(void)
set_highmem_pages_init();
+ after_bootmem = 1;
this hack can go away once we have a proper percpu_alloc() that can be
used early enough.
where is that fancy patch? current percpu_alloc(), will keep big
pointer in array..., instead of put that pointer in percpu_area
64bit has that after_bootmem already.
or at least introduce a "bootmem agnostic" allocator instead of
open-coding the after_bootmem flag.
Something like:
early_kzalloc()
?
Andrew, any preferences?
My mind reading ain't what it was, and this after_bootmem flag is
write-only in this patch.
So what's all this about?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: [RFC PATCH] sparse_irq aka dyn_irq
- From: Yinghai Lu
- Re: [RFC PATCH] sparse_irq aka dyn_irq
- References:
- [RFC PATCH] sparse_irq aka dyn_irq
- From: Yinghai Lu
- Re: [RFC PATCH] sparse_irq aka dyn_irq
- From: Ingo Molnar
- Re: [RFC PATCH] sparse_irq aka dyn_irq
- From: Yinghai Lu
- Re: [RFC PATCH] sparse_irq aka dyn_irq
- From: Ingo Molnar
- [RFC PATCH] sparse_irq aka dyn_irq
- Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH 1/2] mmc_block: print better data error message after timeout
- Next by Date: Re: [PATCH] sparse_irq aka dyn_irq v10
- Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH] sparse_irq aka dyn_irq v10
- Next by thread: Re: [RFC PATCH] sparse_irq aka dyn_irq
- Index(es):