From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: neidhard.kim@lge.com (Kim, Jong-Sung) Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2012 15:54:49 +0900 Subject: [PATCH] [RESEND] arm: limit memblock base address for early_pte_alloc In-Reply-To: References: <1338880312-17561-1-git-send-email-minchan@kernel.org> <025701cd457e$d5065410$7f12fc30$@lge.com> <20120627160220.GA2310@linaro.org> <00e801cd54f0$eb8a3540$c29e9fc0$@lge.com> Message-ID: <010e01cd54fa$e9c93fd0$bd5bbf70$@lge.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org > From: Nicolas Pitre [mailto:nicolas.pitre at linaro.org] > Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2012 3:26 PM > > On Thu, 28 Jun 2012, Kim, Jong-Sung wrote: > > > Thank you for your comment, Dave! It was not that sophisticated > > choice, but I thought that normal embedded system trying to reduce the > > BOM would have a big-enough first memblock memory region. However > > you're right. There can be exceptional systems. Then, how do you think > about following manner: > [...] > > This still has some possibilities for failure. > Can you kindly describe the possible failure path? > Please have a look at the two patches I've posted to fix this in a better > way. > I'm setting up for your elegant patches. ;-) From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from psmtp.com (na3sys010amx133.postini.com [74.125.245.133]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 0797D6B0069 for ; Thu, 28 Jun 2012 02:54:56 -0400 (EDT) From: "Kim, Jong-Sung" References: <1338880312-17561-1-git-send-email-minchan@kernel.org> <025701cd457e$d5065410$7f12fc30$@lge.com> <20120627160220.GA2310@linaro.org> <00e801cd54f0$eb8a3540$c29e9fc0$@lge.com> In-Reply-To: Subject: RE: [PATCH] [RESEND] arm: limit memblock base address for early_pte_alloc Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2012 15:54:49 +0900 Message-ID: <010e01cd54fa$e9c93fd0$bd5bbf70$@lge.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Language: ko Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: 'Nicolas Pitre' Cc: 'Dave Martin' , 'Minchan Kim' , 'Russell King' , 'Catalin Marinas' , 'Chanho Min' , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org > From: Nicolas Pitre [mailto:nicolas.pitre@linaro.org] > Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2012 3:26 PM > > On Thu, 28 Jun 2012, Kim, Jong-Sung wrote: > > > Thank you for your comment, Dave! It was not that sophisticated > > choice, but I thought that normal embedded system trying to reduce the > > BOM would have a big-enough first memblock memory region. However > > you're right. There can be exceptional systems. Then, how do you think > about following manner: > [...] > > This still has some possibilities for failure. > Can you kindly describe the possible failure path? > Please have a look at the two patches I've posted to fix this in a better > way. > I'm setting up for your elegant patches. ;-) -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754670Ab2F1Gy4 (ORCPT ); Thu, 28 Jun 2012 02:54:56 -0400 Received: from LGEMRELSE7Q.lge.com ([156.147.1.151]:45954 "EHLO LGEMRELSE7Q.lge.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750859Ab2F1Gyz (ORCPT ); Thu, 28 Jun 2012 02:54:55 -0400 X-AuditID: 9c930197-b7b49ae0000027b8-79-4febffb95dbc From: "Kim, Jong-Sung" To: "'Nicolas Pitre'" Cc: "'Dave Martin'" , "'Minchan Kim'" , "'Russell King'" , "'Catalin Marinas'" , "'Chanho Min'" , , , References: <1338880312-17561-1-git-send-email-minchan@kernel.org> <025701cd457e$d5065410$7f12fc30$@lge.com> <20120627160220.GA2310@linaro.org> <00e801cd54f0$eb8a3540$c29e9fc0$@lge.com> In-Reply-To: Subject: RE: [PATCH] [RESEND] arm: limit memblock base address for early_pte_alloc Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2012 15:54:49 +0900 Message-ID: <010e01cd54fa$e9c93fd0$bd5bbf70$@lge.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0 Thread-Index: AQLyw5u255N8mX4sZ4V+/prpc6IPugIAV1CoAy3QrR8BzxQbAAIE2lnulHxY1iA= Content-Language: ko X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAA== Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > From: Nicolas Pitre [mailto:nicolas.pitre@linaro.org] > Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2012 3:26 PM > > On Thu, 28 Jun 2012, Kim, Jong-Sung wrote: > > > Thank you for your comment, Dave! It was not that sophisticated > > choice, but I thought that normal embedded system trying to reduce the > > BOM would have a big-enough first memblock memory region. However > > you're right. There can be exceptional systems. Then, how do you think > about following manner: > [...] > > This still has some possibilities for failure. > Can you kindly describe the possible failure path? > Please have a look at the two patches I've posted to fix this in a better > way. > I'm setting up for your elegant patches. ;-)