Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 27 Apr 2008 17:33:50 -0700 | From | "Yinghai Lu" <> | Subject | Re: [git pull] "big box" x86 changes, bootmem/sparsemem |
| |
On Sun, Apr 27, 2008 at 3:48 PM, Johannes Weiner <hannes@saeurebad.de> wrote: > Hi Ingo, > > > Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> writes: > > > * Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote: > > > >> IOW, they'd be big enough that people hopefully don't start nitpicking > >> about some *totally* uninteresting small detail, but small enough that > >> people can read it through without losing concentration about a > >> quarter of the way in. > > > > ok. Here's the "memory management" type of changes: > > > > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/x86/linux-2.6-x86-bigbox-bootmem.git for-linus > > > > the other sub-trees will depend on these changes. I think these > > infrastructure and other improvements are mergable and pullable as-is. > > > > Ingo > > > > ------------------> > > [...] > > > > mm: allow reserve_bootmem() cross nodes > > I find it sad that this goes in now. I wrote a clean version of > reserve_bootmem() [1] and it was rejected with arguments that I did not > understand [2] and that were not further explained even though I asked > for it [3]. > > http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/4/16/76 > http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/4/16/234 > http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/4/16/250 > > Your comment was rather unfair, because it gave the impression you did > not read the thread before replying. And you did not react to other > explicit questions from me. If you find my patches to be crap, say so > and please explain WHY so I have a chance to improve.
this thread is for reserve_bootmem ?
You patch is regarding to free_bootmem, and it doesn't work with intel cross node boxes.
YH
| |