Re: [Lhms-devel] CONFIG_NONLINEAR for small systems

[Hiroyuki KAMEZAWA <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>]

Hi,
Andy Whitcroft wrote:

> The generalised CONFIG_NONLINEAR memory model described at OLS
> seemed provide more than enough decriptive power to address this
> issue but provided far more functionality that was required.
> Particularly it breaks the identity V=P+c to allow compression of
> the kernel address space, which is not required on these smaller systems.
> 
We have *future* issue to hotplug kernel memory and kernel's virtual address renaming
will be used for it.
As you say, if kernel memory is not remaped,  keeping V=P+c looks good.
But our current direction is to enable kernel-memory-hotplug, which
needs kernel's virtual memory renaming, I think.

NONLINEAR_OPTIMISED looks a bit complicated.
Can replace them with some other name ? Hmm...NONLINEAR_NOREMAP ?


> This patch set is implemented as a proof-of-concept to show
> that a simplified CONFIG_NONLINEAR based implementation could provide
> sufficient flexibility to solve the problems for these systems.
> 
Very interesting. But I'm not sure whether we can use more page->flags bit :[.
I recommend you not to use more page->flags bits.


Kame <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>

--
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: <a href=mailto:"aart@kvack.org"> aart@kvack.org </a>