From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Santosh Shilimkar Subject: Re: [PATCH] WIP: HACK: LPAE, BOOTMEM and NO_BOOTMEM Date: Mon, 5 Aug 2013 11:29:46 -0400 Message-ID: <51FFC4EA.40908@ti.com> References: <20130629175743.GA382@mtj.dyndns.org> <20130629195549.GE3353@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <51D18DBA.6090608@ti.com> <51F1A7AA.8080700@ti.com> <20130725223658.GJ26107@mtj.dyndns.org> <51F1B17F.30902@ti.com> <20130726030812.GB30195@mtj.dyndns.org> <51FC1F3A.8090201@ti.com> <20130805150127.GC19631@mtj.dyndns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20130805150127.GC19631@mtj.dyndns.org> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=m.gmane.org@lists.infradead.org To: Tejun Heo Cc: Nicolas Pitre , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, Russell King - ARM Linux , Sam Ravnborg , Catalin Marinas , Will Deacon , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Ingo Molnar , Benjamin Herrenschmidt , "H. Peter Anvin" , "sparclinux@vger.kernel.org" , Paul Mackerras , Andrew Morton , Yinghai Lu , "David S. Miller" , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arch.vger.kernel.org On Monday 05 August 2013 11:01 AM, Tejun Heo wrote: > Hello, > > On Fri, Aug 02, 2013 at 05:06:02PM -0400, Santosh Shilimkar wrote: >> Looking at the situation, how about proceeding with patch updating >> the bootmem API signatures to use phys_addr_t which can unblock me >> to get my machine working. > > I'm not sure about that. No matter how you play it, it'll end up > duplicating memblock interface. > fair enough. >> Introduction of new API, conversions of core kernel code and then > > What new API are we talking about? Wasn't the plan to convert core > kernel code to use memblock and let bootmem emulate bootmem API? > There's no new API. > So looks like I am bit confused here. The current memblock_alloc() API just returns the physical address which not mapped memory. Most of the bootmem users including core code expects the mapped memory pointer which the code can directly operate on. So the current memblock_alloc() isn't going to help. The nobootmem.c has __alloc_memory_core_early() which is actually used by most of the bootmem wrappers to achieve the same. So my assumption was that we need an equivalent exported memblock API. What am I missing? >> arches moving away from bootmem is going to take significant time > > And arches moving away from bootmem doesn't have to happen now. > I agree. The core code conversion is more of an issue. Regards, Santosh From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from bear.ext.ti.com ([192.94.94.41]:57715 "EHLO bear.ext.ti.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753102Ab3HEPan (ORCPT ); Mon, 5 Aug 2013 11:30:43 -0400 Message-ID: <51FFC4EA.40908@ti.com> Date: Mon, 5 Aug 2013 11:29:46 -0400 From: Santosh Shilimkar MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH] WIP: HACK: LPAE, BOOTMEM and NO_BOOTMEM References: <20130629175743.GA382@mtj.dyndns.org> <20130629195549.GE3353@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <51D18DBA.6090608@ti.com> <51F1A7AA.8080700@ti.com> <20130725223658.GJ26107@mtj.dyndns.org> <51F1B17F.30902@ti.com> <20130726030812.GB30195@mtj.dyndns.org> <51FC1F3A.8090201@ti.com> <20130805150127.GC19631@mtj.dyndns.org> In-Reply-To: <20130805150127.GC19631@mtj.dyndns.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Tejun Heo Cc: Yinghai Lu , Russell King - ARM Linux , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, Linux Kernel Mailing List , Catalin Marinas , Will Deacon , Nicolas Pitre , Ingo Molnar , Andrew Morton , "H. Peter Anvin" , Benjamin Herrenschmidt , Paul Mackerras , "David S. Miller" , "sparclinux@vger.kernel.org" , Sam Ravnborg , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org Message-ID: <20130805152946.NNKwqPi2F4RtlI3MQQ6xJh82tmuSSsdq46L9UoTQcy0@z> On Monday 05 August 2013 11:01 AM, Tejun Heo wrote: > Hello, > > On Fri, Aug 02, 2013 at 05:06:02PM -0400, Santosh Shilimkar wrote: >> Looking at the situation, how about proceeding with patch updating >> the bootmem API signatures to use phys_addr_t which can unblock me >> to get my machine working. > > I'm not sure about that. No matter how you play it, it'll end up > duplicating memblock interface. > fair enough. >> Introduction of new API, conversions of core kernel code and then > > What new API are we talking about? Wasn't the plan to convert core > kernel code to use memblock and let bootmem emulate bootmem API? > There's no new API. > So looks like I am bit confused here. The current memblock_alloc() API just returns the physical address which not mapped memory. Most of the bootmem users including core code expects the mapped memory pointer which the code can directly operate on. So the current memblock_alloc() isn't going to help. The nobootmem.c has __alloc_memory_core_early() which is actually used by most of the bootmem wrappers to achieve the same. So my assumption was that we need an equivalent exported memblock API. What am I missing? >> arches moving away from bootmem is going to take significant time > > And arches moving away from bootmem doesn't have to happen now. > I agree. The core code conversion is more of an issue. Regards, Santosh