From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752113AbWFLQLP (ORCPT ); Mon, 12 Jun 2006 12:11:15 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752114AbWFLQLP (ORCPT ); Mon, 12 Jun 2006 12:11:15 -0400 Received: from e31.co.us.ibm.com ([32.97.110.149]:45779 "EHLO e31.co.us.ibm.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752113AbWFLQLP (ORCPT ); Mon, 12 Jun 2006 12:11:15 -0400 Subject: Re: [SPARSEMEM] confusing uses of SPARSEM_EXTREME (try #2) From: Dave Hansen To: Franck Cc: apw@shadowen.org, Linux Kernel Mailing List In-Reply-To: <448D1117.8010407@innova-card.com> References: <448D1117.8010407@innova-card.com> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 09:10:03 -0700 Message-Id: <1150128603.13644.28.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.4.1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 2006-06-12 at 09:00 +0200, Franck Bui-Huu wrote: > Is it me or the use of CONFIG_SPARSEMEM_EXTREME is really confusing in > mm/sparce.c ? Shouldn't we use CONFIG_SPARSEMEM_STATIC instead like > the following patch suggests ? I'll take positive config options over negative ones any day. I find it easier to read things that say what they *are* rather than what they are *not*. In any case, STATIC is really there as an override for architectures to say, "I know what I am doing, I use gcc 3.4 and above, or, I don't want to use bootmem". Extreme is really there to say, "I want two-level lookups because my memory is extremely sparse." Make sense? -- Dave