From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0E9D5C25B78 for ; Mon, 13 May 2024 23:03:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id E21D88D000F; Mon, 13 May 2024 19:03:49 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id DAAE88D000D; Mon, 13 May 2024 19:03:49 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id C4B718D000F; Mon, 13 May 2024 19:03:49 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from relay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0014.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.14]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A69CD8D000D for ; Mon, 13 May 2024 19:03:49 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin04.hostedemail.com (a10.router.float.18 [10.200.18.1]) by unirelay02.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4D3A7120F88 for ; Mon, 13 May 2024 23:03:49 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 82114901778.04.2E4E4F6 Received: from dfw.source.kernel.org (dfw.source.kernel.org [139.178.84.217]) by imf22.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 99628C0017 for ; Mon, 13 May 2024 23:03:46 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: imf22.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=kernel.org header.s=k20201202 header.b=LHglUSJv; spf=pass (imf22.hostedemail.com: domain of rppt@kernel.org designates 139.178.84.217 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=rppt@kernel.org; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=kernel.org ARC-Seal: i=1; s=arc-20220608; d=hostedemail.com; t=1715641426; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=ocX185Nuwf/AoUv5WokK+G7rL1HSOPhKPNkf7fS5lNmpjCq6Hs9rHInPVpTii/NMZkNGr9 LQm76vJzAhnfWDxwxfcfmV+uskWaXfA1d0Ow2lu9FeVqeQrK1AHZD0Zxg0trNYr/7/NRUW sr5vQwS5rI1p+TyNS1JCqxDzH8AMcgc= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; imf22.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=kernel.org header.s=k20201202 header.b=LHglUSJv; spf=pass (imf22.hostedemail.com: domain of rppt@kernel.org designates 139.178.84.217 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=rppt@kernel.org; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=kernel.org ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hostedemail.com; s=arc-20220608; t=1715641426; h=from:from:sender:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references:dkim-signature; bh=Xj13MDv2v1OR1cEVzBMMBz2w0xUZkS5zxZRv1zjk/RI=; b=7N579N33eKdIMTShwyt3D0oJR3w5zVzmi17qLtAWgm6bPf50ovLk0cCuAft9rgSMhwKJyz yeHpTV0A34mD6T5GGu4ItkZ5zjgg4COpsz5wnqVMIw5AsU9VKAUWHJ5YWREqHZ90TwtBvB BzHAFdlbaq+vuK7E1yOt2H8IBWtwBlk= Received: from smtp.kernel.org (transwarp.subspace.kernel.org [100.75.92.58]) by dfw.source.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 997C660F86; Mon, 13 May 2024 23:03:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 205FBC113CC; Mon, 13 May 2024 23:03:45 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1715641425; bh=AyyHvojKMSi6qWF4yeT/33LQLlz1XSbsp9nPsipDUIY=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=LHglUSJvIv6XPLEb6IqUcIT2WuG19zUWHXWNbXx52ZrZp/j5vLdISj9d3Y983XNm1 qAd/ltT+g0owBVk7I5Rkrqhbk8uEMgqWLNp5cS6uCqyIVdXxelbbizIG9hqciebzbL d75kH0WA6ST00canVXwtxcUuuzcx2WemwtxKsNhSPFRAs4nxGOLxWhZ/ajO5HB7MSw TZn06Bpxq9yhKkAhaYxycU9O863b4KCEhlg7GR9rg/0hRmn4TvuIvtDc+1joyyxzTJ HC9o5DhWK6DHn8WO1Dnd/SuE01b+zoFG28mO4C4gDvsvN33SDl0G8WqLzAerG7q1Uc AxqTGVLy+/MEA== Date: Mon, 13 May 2024 17:02:07 -0600 From: Mike Rapoport To: Oscar Salvador Cc: Matthew Wilcox , lsf-pc@lists.linux-foundation.org, linux-mm@kvack.org Subject: Re: [LSF/MM/BFP TOPIC] Deprecate SPARSEMEM and have only SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP Message-ID: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Rspam-User: X-Rspamd-Server: rspam06 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 99628C0017 X-Stat-Signature: yyacbj53r75cj5i8uzi19hrg4wrkiy6h X-HE-Tag: 1715641426-119647 X-HE-Meta: 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 QJCZ1N/F oY4GhNydJtP7i350eUZuIdCm9tehSKB0kVErGsmVUwoyjWDdDvh5QQAWBRH+UzM0NtlTbBPkcSK1lRrnO0kLKBYjz7xfPEyLPRVFwMOZNHwrEcxC2qe7X+oIetc3wAF2kkUqMy39DRB6f+qbSzmX8iQ3hXGy+7NiVSoC83BBKdBv/yKwJPtPRAf478hmx5fmtmaVFy+03aXArIgFqNVgUAUsLOTzhmsijcu9LIKNldDJZWrE= X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: On Mon, May 13, 2024 at 11:43:09AM +0200, Oscar Salvador wrote: > On Fri, May 10, 2024 at 11:03:58PM +0100, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > > I'm a little concerned about having this conversation without the > > affected architecture maintainers in the room. However, I can speak to > > PA-RISC. > > Yes, having the architecture maintainers would be great. > > > Early models have a dense memory layout and we need not be concerned > > with them. I'm not quite sure about the PA-7200 to PA-8500 ccio based > > machines, would need to do some research. For the PA-8500+ astro based > > machines, the 256MB that would be in the range 3.75GB to 4GB is > > relocated to 67.75-68GB to leave space for PCI mmio. So if you have > > a machine with 8GB of memory (fairly typical for a J6000 machine), > > you'd have three ranges of memory: > > > > 0-3.75GB > > 4-8GB > > 67.75-68GB > > > > and I'd like to see an analysis of how laying out memmap would differ > > for those machines. > > Maybe Mike can prove me wrong, but I assume that memblock will report > the above ranges as memory, and the 3.75GB to 4GB as somewhat reserved. The populated ranges will be reported as memory and it seems that there just will be a hole at the 3.75GB-4GB range. Not that it's important from the sections layout perspective. > -- > Oscar Salvador > SUSE Labs > -- Sincerely yours, Mike.