Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 14 Oct 2002 17:51:39 -0700 | From | Matthew Dobson <> | Subject | Re: [rfc][patch] Memory Binding API v0.3 2.5.41 |
| |
Martin J. Bligh wrote: >>>>>4) An ordered zone list is probably the more natural mapping. >>>> >>>>See my comments above about per zone/memblk. And you reemphasize my point, how do we order the zone lists in such a way that a user of the API can easily know/find out what zone #5 is? >>> >>>Could you explain how that problem is different from finding out >>>what memblk #5 is ... I don't see the difference? >> >>Errm... __memblk_to_node(5) > > As opposed to creating __zone_to_node(5) ? > >>I"m not saying that we couldn't add a similar interface for zones... something along the lines of: >> __memblk_and_zone_to_flat_zone_number(5, DMA) >>or some such. It just isn't there now... > > Surely this would dispose of the need for memblks? If not, then > I'd agree it's probably just adding more complication. Well, since each node's memory (or memblk in the parlance of my head ;) has several 'zones' in it (DMA, HIGHMEM, etc), this conversion function will need 2 parameters. It may well be called __node_and_zone_type_to_flat_zone_number(node, DMA|NORMAL|HIGHMEM).
Or, we could have: __zone_to_node(5) = node # and __zone_to_zone_type(5) = DMA|NORMAL|HIGHMEM.
But either way, we would need to specify both pieces.
Cheers!
-Matt
- 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/
| |