Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 23 Jun 2006 14:22:13 +0200 | Subject | Re: 2.6.17-mm1 | From | Franck Bui-Huu <> |
| |
Mel Gorman wrote: > On (22/06/06 19:25), Franck Bui-Huu didst pronounce: >>>> >>> I know, but what I'm getting at is that ARCH_PFN_OFFSET may be unnecessary >>> with flatmem-relax-requirement-for-memory-to-start-at-pfn-0.patch applied. >> yes it seems so. But ARCH_PFN_OFFSET has been used before your patch >> has been sent. So your patch seems to be incomplete... > > Difficult to argue with that logic. >
sorry, I was just meaning that ARCH_PFN_OFFSET had been introduced to solve this before your patch has been sent. So the requirement for memory to start at pfn 0 is already solved.
Your patch solves the problem in a different way, but it's incompatible with the current one (ARCH_PFN_OFFSET).
IMHO the question is now, which method is the best one ? If it's yours the we probably need to get ride of the previous method and add yours (but don't forget to modify arch such ARM which are currently using ARCH_PFN_OFFSET).
Franck - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |