From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
To: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@kernel.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/9] x86: move range related operation to one file
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2009 13:26:39 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4B2BF38F.3090101@zytor.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4B2BE348.207@kernel.org>
On 12/18/2009 12:17 PM, Yinghai Lu wrote:
>
> yes here is we have [start, end] instead of [start, end)
>
> those range operation is used for one purpose:
> add several ranges, and subtract some other ranges, it will take out overlap between those two sets.
> and leave out the range that could be used.
>
> and it is array based...for early stage.
>
Yes. We should be able to use the *exact same code* for the e820
ranges, using the e820 attribute as the attribute parameters, and a
simple boolean for the case where all you want is inclusion/exclusion.
And yes, I agree array based is the right thing to do for the early code.
Note that my array-based version only had an insert operation, no delete
operation -- that is because the delete operation is simply an insert
operation of attribute 0.
-hpa
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-12-18 21:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <4B2B4C19.6010402@kernel.org>
2009-12-18 9:46 ` [PATCH 1/9] x86: move range related operation to one file Yinghai Lu
2009-12-18 20:10 ` H. Peter Anvin
2009-12-18 20:17 ` Yinghai Lu
2009-12-18 21:26 ` H. Peter Anvin [this message]
2009-12-18 23:47 ` Yinghai Lu
2009-12-19 0:25 ` H. Peter Anvin
2009-12-19 0:27 ` Yinghai Lu
2009-12-19 0:34 ` H. Peter Anvin
2009-12-18 9:46 ` [PATCH 2/9] x86: check range in update range Yinghai Lu
2009-12-18 17:23 ` Jesse Barnes
2009-12-18 19:39 ` Yinghai Lu
2009-12-18 9:47 ` [PATCH 3/9] x86: call early_res_to_bootmem one time Yinghai Lu
2009-12-18 9:47 ` [PATCH 4/9] x86: introduce max_early_res and early_res_count Yinghai Lu
2009-12-18 9:47 ` [PATCH 5/9] x86: dynamic increase early_res array size -v2 Yinghai Lu
2009-12-18 9:47 ` [PATCH 6/9] x86: print bootmem free before pci_iommu_alloc and free_all_bootmem -v2 Yinghai Lu
2009-12-18 9:48 ` [PATCH 7/9] x86: make early_node_mem get mem > 4g if possible -v2 Yinghai Lu
2009-12-18 9:48 ` [PATCH 8/9] x86: only call dma32_reserve_bootmem 64bit !CONFIG_NUMA Yinghai Lu
2009-12-18 9:48 ` [PATCH 9/9] x86: make 64 bit use early_res instead of bootmem before slab Yinghai Lu
2009-12-20 9:18 ` [PATCH 1/2] sparsemem: put usemap for one node together Yinghai Lu
2009-12-20 9:20 ` [PATCH 2/2] sparsemem: put mem map " Yinghai Lu
2009-12-28 8:35 ` Ingo Molnar
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4B2BF38F.3090101@zytor.com \
--to=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=yinghai@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.