From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from gate.crashing.org (gate.crashing.org [63.228.1.57]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E09922C0077 for ; Wed, 3 Jul 2013 08:28:57 +1000 (EST) Message-ID: <1372804109.4122.25.camel@pasglop> Subject: Re: [PATCH -V3 2/4] powerpc/kvm: Contiguous memory allocator based hash page table allocation From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt To: Alexander Graf Date: Wed, 03 Jul 2013 08:28:29 +1000 In-Reply-To: <51D2EDD7.9060205@suse.de> References: <1372743918-12293-1-git-send-email-aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <1372743918-12293-2-git-send-email-aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <51D2EDD7.9060205@suse.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Mime-Version: 1.0 Cc: kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org, mina86@mina86.com, linux-mm@kvack.org, paulus@samba.org, "Aneesh Kumar K.V" , linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, m.szyprowski@samsung.com List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Tue, 2013-07-02 at 17:12 +0200, Alexander Graf wrote: > Is CMA a mandatory option in the kernel? Or can it be optionally > disabled? If it can be disabled, we should keep the preallocated > fallback case around for systems that have CMA disabled. Why ? More junk code to keep around ... If CMA is disabled, we can limit ourselves to dynamic allocation (with limitation to 16M hash table). Cheers, Ben.