Re: [PATCH 1/4] x86_64: Switch to SPARSE_VIRTUAL

Martin Bligh
2007-04-02T20:39:40Z

Christoph Lameter wrote:
> On Mon, 2 Apr 2007, Dave Hansen wrote:
>
>> I completely agree, it looks like it should be faster. The code
>> certainly has potential benefits. But, to add this neato, apparently
>> more performant feature, we unfortunately have to add code. Adding the
>> code has a cost: code maintenance. This isn't a runtime cost, but it is
>> a real, honest to goodness tradeoff.
>
> Its just the opposite. The vmemmap code is so efficient that we can remove
> lots of other code and gops of these alternate implementations. On x86_64
> its even superior to FLATMEM since FLATMEM still needs a memory reference
> for the mem_map area. So if we make SPARSE standard for all
> configurations then there is no need anymore for FLATMEM DISCONTIG etc
> etc. Can we not cleanup all this mess? Get rid of all the gazillions
> of #ifdefs please? This would ease code maintenance significantly. I hate
> having to constantly navigate my way through all the alternatives.

The original plan when this was first merged was pretty much that -
for sparsemem to replace discontigmem once it was well tested. Seems
to have got stalled halfway through ;-(

Not sure we'll get away with replacing flatmem for all arches, but
we could at least get rid of discontigmem, it seems.

M.