From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2008 20:48:16 +0200 From: Ingo Molnar Subject: Re: [RFC][patch 2/5] mm: Node-setup agnostic free_bootmem() Message-ID: <20080416184816.GA4400@elte.hu> References: <20080416113629.947746497@skyscraper.fehenstaub.lan> <20080416113719.092060936@skyscraper.fehenstaub.lan> <86802c440804161054h6f0cfc3dmde49006afb7889b2@mail.gmail.com> <86802c440804161144id4f2a68i37513ac0428c693@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <86802c440804161144id4f2a68i37513ac0428c693@mail.gmail.com> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Yinghai Lu Cc: Johannes Weiner , LKML , Linux MM , Andi Kleen , Yasunori Goto , KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki , Christoph Lameter , Andrew Morton , "Siddha, Suresh B" List-ID: * Yinghai Lu wrote: > > Yes, it should work well with cross nodes case. > > > > but please add boundary check on free_bootmem_node too. > > also please note: it will have problem span nodes box. > > for example: node 0: 0-2g, 4-6g, node1: 2-4g, 6-8g. and if ramdisk sit > creoss 2G boundary. you will only free the range before 2g. yes. Such systems _will_ become more common - so the "this is rare" arguments are incorrect. bootmem has to be robust enough to deal with it. Ingo -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org