From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Mosberger Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2003 00:12:39 +0000 Subject: Re: [PATCH] (2.4.x bk) efi_memmap_walk_uc Message-Id: List-Id: References: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org >>>>> On Tue, 29 Jul 2003 17:00:26 -0700, Christopher Wedgwood said: Christopher> On Tue, Jul 29, 2003 at 03:54:27PM -0700, David Mosberger wrote: >> Let's stick with a tried-and-true malloc/free-like interface (nobody >> every gets size arguments to free() right, do they?). Christopher> I'd like to claim this is too complex I don't buy this. Just store a header along with the actual data (yes, accesses to the header will be slow, but nobody cares). Christopher> Jack also pointed out for MINSTATE handling on SN2 we Christopher> would want local-node pages so perhaps something like: Christopher> u64 ia64_uc_alloc(u64 nbytes, int nodeid, int flags); Christopher> void ia64_uc_free(u64 paddr); Christopher> Simply claim '0' is not a useful physical address in Christopher> this sense and thus signifies and error? Christopher> The 'flags' seems overly complex but would be a Christopher> mechanism to insist that memory is allocated from the Christopher> given node (as opposed to just a hint for locality). Christopher> Comments? The "uc" should be changed to "ucmem" or something like that, to avoid confusion with allocating uncached address space (what we're allocating here is normal memory which is mapped uncached). --david