From: xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com (Cong Wang)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH v3] MM: CMA: add a simple kernel module as the helper to test CMA
Date: Wed, 07 Mar 2012 12:55:37 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4F56EA49.8070808@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAGsJ_4x4CwD+WAE9d+Xob_tfwqmE6SdBdBd5EbC64XBi4Uzvgg@mail.gmail.com>
On 03/07/2012 12:49 PM, Barry Song wrote:
> 2012/3/7 Cong Wang<xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com>:
>> On 03/07/2012 11:14 AM, Barry Song wrote:
>>>
>>> From: Barry Song<Baohua.Song@csr.com>
>>>
>>> Any write request to /dev/cma_test will let the module to allocate memory
>>> from
>>> CMA, for example:
>>>
>>> 1st time
>>> $ echo 1024> /dev/cma_test
>>> will require cma_test to request 1MB(1024KB)
>>> 2nd time
>>> $ echo 2048> /dev/cma_test
>>> will require cma_test to request 2MB(2048KB)
>>>
>>> Any read request to /dev/cma_test will let the module to free the 1st
>>> valid
>>> memory from CMA, for example:
>>>
>>> 1st time
>>> $ cat /dev/cma_test
>>> will require cma_test to free the 1MB allocated in the first write request
>>> 2nd time
>>> $ cat /dev/cma_test
>>> will require cma_test to free the 2MB allocated in the second write
>>> request
>>
>>
>> Any reason why using /dev not /proc or /sys?
>
> pls note it is just a test module to verify CMA at runtime. it is not
> important either it is /dev, it is /proc or it is /sys.
Why not important? You want it to be merged, don't you?
>
> any way to make things easier, we take that way.
>
Why /dev interface is easier than /proc and /sys? Confused, actually I
think /proc or /sys should be easier...
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com>
To: Barry Song <21cnbao@gmail.com>
Cc: Barry Song <Barry.Song@csr.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, workgroup.linux@csr.com,
mina86@mina86.com, Barry Song <Baohua.Song@csr.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, m.szyprowski@samsung.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] MM: CMA: add a simple kernel module as the helper to test CMA
Date: Wed, 07 Mar 2012 12:55:37 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4F56EA49.8070808@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAGsJ_4x4CwD+WAE9d+Xob_tfwqmE6SdBdBd5EbC64XBi4Uzvgg@mail.gmail.com>
On 03/07/2012 12:49 PM, Barry Song wrote:
> 2012/3/7 Cong Wang<xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com>:
>> On 03/07/2012 11:14 AM, Barry Song wrote:
>>>
>>> From: Barry Song<Baohua.Song@csr.com>
>>>
>>> Any write request to /dev/cma_test will let the module to allocate memory
>>> from
>>> CMA, for example:
>>>
>>> 1st time
>>> $ echo 1024> /dev/cma_test
>>> will require cma_test to request 1MB(1024KB)
>>> 2nd time
>>> $ echo 2048> /dev/cma_test
>>> will require cma_test to request 2MB(2048KB)
>>>
>>> Any read request to /dev/cma_test will let the module to free the 1st
>>> valid
>>> memory from CMA, for example:
>>>
>>> 1st time
>>> $ cat /dev/cma_test
>>> will require cma_test to free the 1MB allocated in the first write request
>>> 2nd time
>>> $ cat /dev/cma_test
>>> will require cma_test to free the 2MB allocated in the second write
>>> request
>>
>>
>> Any reason why using /dev not /proc or /sys?
>
> pls note it is just a test module to verify CMA at runtime. it is not
> important either it is /dev, it is /proc or it is /sys.
Why not important? You want it to be merged, don't you?
>
> any way to make things easier, we take that way.
>
Why /dev interface is easier than /proc and /sys? Confused, actually I
think /proc or /sys should be easier...
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-03-07 4:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-03-07 3:14 [PATCH v3] MM: CMA: add a simple kernel module as the helper to test CMA Barry Song
2012-03-07 3:14 ` Barry Song
2012-03-07 4:14 ` Cong Wang
2012-03-07 4:14 ` Cong Wang
2012-03-07 4:49 ` Barry Song
2012-03-07 4:49 ` Barry Song
2012-03-07 4:55 ` Cong Wang [this message]
2012-03-07 4:55 ` Cong Wang
2012-03-07 4:57 ` Barry Song
2012-03-07 4:57 ` Barry Song
2012-03-07 5:01 ` Cong Wang
2012-03-07 5:01 ` Cong Wang
2012-03-07 5:05 ` Barry Song
2012-03-07 5:05 ` Barry Song
2012-03-07 5:09 ` Cong Wang
2012-03-07 5:09 ` Cong Wang
2012-03-07 5:17 ` Barry Song
2012-03-07 5:17 ` Barry Song
2012-03-07 5:22 ` Cong Wang
2012-03-07 5:22 ` Cong Wang
2012-03-07 5:40 ` Barry Song
2012-03-07 5:40 ` Barry Song
2012-03-07 10:38 ` Barry Song
2012-03-07 10:38 ` Barry Song
2012-03-07 10:48 ` Michal Nazarewicz
2012-03-07 10:48 ` Michal Nazarewicz
2012-03-07 10:55 ` Barry Song
2012-03-07 10:55 ` Barry Song
2012-03-07 10:59 ` Michal Nazarewicz
2012-03-07 10:59 ` Michal Nazarewicz
2012-03-07 11:12 ` Barry Song
2012-03-07 11:12 ` Barry Song
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=4F56EA49.8070808@gmail.com \
--to=xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.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.