lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [May]   [25]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [GIT PULL] scheduler fixes
    Ingo Molnar wrote:
    >
    > Would it be possible to restructure things to move kmalloc init to
    > before IRQ init as well? We have a couple of uglinesses there too.
    >
    > Conceptually, memory should be the first thing set up in general, in
    > a kernel. It does not need IRQs, timers, the scheduler or any of the
    > IO facilities and abstractions. All of them need memory though - and
    > as Linux scales to more and more hardware via the same single image,
    > so will we get more and more dynamic concepts like cpumask_var_t and
    > sparse-irqs, which want to allocate very early.
    >
    > setup_arch() is one huge function that sets up all architecture
    > details at once - but if we split a separate setup_arch_mem() out of
    > it, and left the rest in setup_arch (and moved it further down), we
    > could remove much of bootmem (especially the ugly uses).
    >
    > This might even be doable realistically, and we could thus librarize
    > bootmem and eliminate it from x86 at least. Perhaps.
    >

    The only thing that might make sense to set up before memory might be
    exceptions (as opposed to interrupts), but both of those should be
    doable very very early.

    -hpa

    --
    H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center
    I work for Intel. I don't speak on their behalf.



    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2009-05-25 07:01    [W:3.940 / U:0.100 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site