From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from psmtp.com (na3sys010amx162.postini.com [74.125.245.162]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 5D7DF6B0002 for ; Wed, 20 Mar 2013 16:18:42 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2013 21:18:33 +0100 From: Sam Ravnborg Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] mm, nobootmem: fix wrong usage of max_low_pfn Message-ID: <20130320201833.GA26387@merkur.ravnborg.org> References: <1363670161-9214-1-git-send-email-iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com> <20130319062522.GG8858@lge.com> <20130319064247.GH8858@lge.com> <20130319080721.GI8858@lge.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20130319080721.GI8858@lge.com> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Joonsoo Kim Cc: Yinghai Lu , Andrew Morton , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-mm@kvack.org" , Johannes Weiner , Jiang Liu On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 05:07:21PM +0900, Joonsoo Kim wrote: > On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 12:35:45AM -0700, Yinghai Lu wrote: > > Can you check why sparc do not need to change interface during converting > > to use memblock to replace bootmem? > > Sure. > According to my understanding to sparc32 code(arch/sparc/mm/init_32.c), > they already use max_low_pfn as the maximum PFN value, > not as the number of pages. I assume you already know... sparc64 uses memblock, but sparc32 does not. I looked at using memblock for sparc32 some time ago but got distracted by other stuff. I recall from back then that these ackward named variables confused me, and some of my confusion was likely rooted in sparc32 using max_low_pfn for something elase than others do. I have no plans to look into adding memblock support for sparc32 right now. But may eventually do so when I get some spare time. Sam -- 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