Re: [PATCH] x86: remove end_pfn in 64bit

[Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@goop.org>]

Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Yinghai Lu <yhlu.kernel@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>   
>> and use max_pfn directly.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Yinghai Lu <yhlu.kernel@gmail.com>
>>     
>
> applied to tip/x86/setup-memory - thanks Yinghai. I have picked up these 
> patches:
>
> Ingo Molnar (1):
>       Merge branch 'x86/setup-memory'
>
> Yinghai Lu (6):
>       x86: fix e820_update_range size when overlapping
>       x86: get max_pfn_mapped in init_memory_mapping
>       x86: add table_top check for alloc_low_page in 64 bit
>       x86: change size if e820_update/remove_range
>       x86: numa 32 using apicid_2_node to get node for logical_apicid
>       x86: remove end_pfn in 64bit
>   

Did you CC: this to me to indicate that "x86_64: replace end_pfn with 
num_physpages" conflicts massively with this patch?  Fortunately I don't 
depend on it, so I don't mind much.

How does "max_pfn" differ from "num_physpages"?  Should one of them go 
as well?

    J