From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wm0-f71.google.com (mail-wm0-f71.google.com [74.125.82.71]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E9D6D6B0005 for ; Tue, 31 Jul 2018 10:42:00 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-wm0-f71.google.com with SMTP id l4-v6so1709284wme.7 for ; Tue, 31 Jul 2018 07:42:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-sor-f65.google.com (mail-sor-f65.google.com. [209.85.220.65]) by mx.google.com with SMTPS id x15-v6sor626047wmh.68.2018.07.31.07.41.59 for (Google Transport Security); Tue, 31 Jul 2018 07:41:59 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2018 16:41:57 +0200 From: Oscar Salvador Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: make __paginginit based on CONFIG_MEMORY_HOTPLUG Message-ID: <20180731144157.GA1499@techadventures.net> References: <20180731124504.27582-1-osalvador@techadventures.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Pavel Tatashin Cc: Andrew Morton , Michal Hocko , Vlastimil Babka , kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com, iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com, Mel Gorman , Souptick Joarder , Linux Memory Management List , LKML , osalvador@suse.de On Tue, Jul 31, 2018 at 08:49:11AM -0400, Pavel Tatashin wrote: > Hi Oscar, > > Have you looked into replacing __paginginit via __meminit ? What is > the reason to keep both? Hi Pavel, Actually, thinking a bit more about this, it might make sense to remove __paginginit altogether and keep only __meminit. Looking at the original commit, I think that it was put as a way to abstract it. After the patchset [1] has been applied, only two functions marked as __paginginit remain, so it will be less hassle to replace that with __meminit. I will send a v2 tomorrow to be applied on top of [1]. [1] https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10548861/ Thanks -- Oscar Salvador SUSE L3