From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1764788AbYDOLyA (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 Apr 2008 07:54:00 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752755AbYDOLxu (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 Apr 2008 07:53:50 -0400 Received: from saeurebad.de ([85.214.36.134]:54484 "EHLO saeurebad.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1763880AbYDOLxt (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 Apr 2008 07:53:49 -0400 From: Johannes Weiner To: Andi Kleen Cc: Andrew Morton , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar , Yinghai Lu , Yasunori Goto , KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki , Christoph Lameter Subject: Re: [patch 2/2] bootmem: Node-setup agnostic free_bootmem() References: <20080412223319.372887160@symbol.fehenstaub.lan> <20080412225850.704752615@symbol.fehenstaub.lan> <87lk3hwv52.fsf@basil.nowhere.org> <20080414232308.ffa4e269.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <48045D6C.1010508@firstfloor.org> Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2008 13:53:38 +0200 In-Reply-To: <48045D6C.1010508@firstfloor.org> (Andi Kleen's message of "Tue, 15 Apr 2008 09:46:52 +0200") Message-ID: <87skxnibb1.fsf@saeurebad.de> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.0.60 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.1.3 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Andi Kleen writes: > Andrew Morton wrote: >> On Sun, 13 Apr 2008 18:56:57 +0200 Andi Kleen wrote: >> >>> Johannes Weiner writes: >>> >>>> Make free_bootmem() look up the node holding the specified address >>>> range which lets it work transparently on single-node and multi-node >>>> configurations. >>> Acked-by: Andi Kleen >>> >>> This is far better than the original change it replaces and which >>> I also objected to in review. >>> >> >> So... do we think these two patches are sufficiently safe and important for >> 2.6.25? > > It's only strictly needed for .26 I think for some (also slightly > dubious) changes queued in git-x86. Does anything yet rely on this new free_bootmem() behaviour? If not, the safest thing would be to just revert the original patch in mainline and drop the second patch completely. Hannes