From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
Date: Tue, 02 Jul 2013 22:28:29 +0000
Subject: Re: [PATCH -V3 2/4] powerpc/kvm: Contiguous memory allocator based hash page table allocation
Message-Id: <1372804109.4122.25.camel@pasglop>
List-Id: <kvm-ppc.vger.kernel.org>
References: <1372743918-12293-1-git-send-email-aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
	 <1372743918-12293-2-git-send-email-aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
	 <51D2EDD7.9060205@suse.de>
In-Reply-To: <51D2EDD7.9060205@suse.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: Alexander Graf <agraf@suse.de>
Cc: "Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>, paulus@samba.org, m.szyprowski@samsung.com, mina86@mina86.com, linux-mm@kvack.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org

On Tue, 2013-07-02 at 17:12 +0200, Alexander Graf wrote:
> Is CMA a mandatory option in the kernel? Or can it be optionally 
> disabled? If it can be disabled, we should keep the preallocated 
> fallback case around for systems that have CMA disabled.

Why ? More junk code to keep around ...

If CMA is disabled, we can limit ourselves to dynamic allocation (with
limitation to 16M hash table).

Cheers,
Ben.