From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755335AbYKJKDw (ORCPT ); Mon, 10 Nov 2008 05:03:52 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1755078AbYKJKDm (ORCPT ); Mon, 10 Nov 2008 05:03:42 -0500 Received: from mx2.mail.elte.hu ([157.181.151.9]:60597 "EHLO mx2.mail.elte.hu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754625AbYKJKDl (ORCPT ); Mon, 10 Nov 2008 05:03:41 -0500 Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2008 11:03:29 +0100 From: Ingo Molnar To: Yinghai Lu Cc: Andrew Morton , Thomas Gleixner , "H. Peter Anvin" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] sparse_irq aka dyn_irq Message-ID: <20081110100329.GA19970@elte.hu> References: <4913F9AA.80500@kernel.org> <20081107084240.GG4435@elte.hu> <491434FB.2050904@kernel.org> <20081107124957.GA21709@elte.hu> <49168BD3.5010204@kernel.org> <20081109073813.GA17180@elte.hu> <86802c440811090003g5ac53822y852a4c1096228f8b@mail.gmail.com> <20081110094033.GL22392@elte.hu> <20081110015511.453a801e.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <4918065A.6050402@kernel.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4918065A.6050402@kernel.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) X-ELTE-VirusStatus: clean X-ELTE-SpamScore: -1.5 X-ELTE-SpamLevel: X-ELTE-SpamCheck: no X-ELTE-SpamVersion: ELTE 2.0 X-ELTE-SpamCheck-Details: score=-1.5 required=5.9 tests=BAYES_00,DNS_FROM_SECURITYSAGE autolearn=no SpamAssassin version=3.2.3 -1.5 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] 0.0 DNS_FROM_SECURITYSAGE RBL: Envelope sender in blackholes.securitysage.com Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org * Yinghai Lu wrote: > Andrew Morton wrote: > > On Mon, 10 Nov 2008 10:40:33 +0100 Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > >>>>> @@ -987,6 +988,8 @@ void __init mem_init(void) > >>>>> > >>>>> set_highmem_pages_init(); > >>>>> > >>>>> + after_bootmem = 1; > >>>> this hack can go away once we have a proper percpu_alloc() that can be > >>>> used early enough. > >>> where is that fancy patch? current percpu_alloc(), will keep big > >>> pointer in array..., instead of put that pointer in percpu_area > >>> > >>> 64bit has that after_bootmem already. > >> or at least introduce a "bootmem agnostic" allocator instead of > >> open-coding the after_bootmem flag. > >> > >> Something like: > >> > >> early_kzalloc() > >> > >> ? > >> > >> Andrew, any preferences? > > > > My mind reading ain't what it was, and this after_bootmem flag is > > write-only in this patch. > > > > So what's all this about? > > if i use alloc_bootmem to get some memory, and later after_bootmem, > can I use kfree to free it? hm, no. If we used alloc_bootmem(), then we must not free it after after_bootmem has been set. Ingo