Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 28 Jun 2012 13:50:16 -0400 (EDT) | From | Nicolas Pitre <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] [RESEND] arm: limit memblock base address for early_pte_alloc |
| |
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
| |