Re: [Patch v4 08/12] memory-hotplug: remove memmap of sparse-vmemmap

Jianguo Wu
2012-12-05T03:23:33Z

Hi Tang,

On 2012/12/5 10:07, Tang Chen wrote:

> Hi Wu,
>
> On 12/04/2012 08:20 PM, Jianguo Wu wrote:
> (snip)
>>>
>>> Seems that we have different ways to handle pages allocated by bootmem
>>> or by regular allocator. Is the checking way in [PATCH 09/12] available
>>> here ?
>>>
>>> + /* bootmem page has reserved flag */
>>> + if (PageReserved(page)) {
>>> ......
>>> + }
>>>
>>> If so, I think we can just merge these two functions.
>>
>> Hmm, direct mapping table isn't allocated by bootmem allocator such as memblock, can't be free by put_page_bootmem().
>> But I will try to merge these two functions.
>>
>
> Oh, I didn't notice this, thanks. :)
>
> (snip)
>
>>>> +
>>>> + __split_large_page(kpte, address, pbase);
>>>
>>> Is this patch going to replace [PATCH 08/12] ?
>>>
>>
>> I wish to replace [PATCH 08/12], but need Congyang and Yasuaki to confirm first:)
>>
>>> If so, __split_large_page() was added and exported in [PATCH 09/12],
>>> then we should move it here, right ?
>>
>> yes.
>>
>> and what do you think about moving vmemmap_pud[pmd/pte]_remove() to arch/x86/mm/init_64.c,
>> to be consistent with vmemmap_populate() ?
>
> It is a good idea since pud/pmd/pte related code could be platform
> dependent. And I'm also trying to move vmemmap_free() to
> arch/x86/mm/init_64.c too. I want to have a common interface just
> like vmemmap_populate(). :)
>

Great.

>>
>> I will rework [PATCH 08/12] and [PATCH 09/12] soon.
>
> I am rebasing the whole patch set now. And I think I chould finish part
> of your work too. A new patch-set is coming soon, and your rework is
> also welcome. :)
>

Since you are rebasing now, I will wait for your new patche-set :).

Thanks.
Jianguo Wu

> Thanks. :)
>
>
>
> .
>