Re: [RFC PATCH] sparse_irq aka dyn_irq

[Yinghai Lu <yinghai@kernel.org>]

Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Yinghai Lu <yinghai@kernel.org> wrote:
> 
>> Andrew Morton wrote:
>>> On Mon, 10 Nov 2008 10:40:33 +0100 Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> wrote:
>>>
>>>>>>> @@ -987,6 +988,8 @@ void __init mem_init(void)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>       set_highmem_pages_init();
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> +     after_bootmem = 1;
>>>>>> this hack can go away once we have a proper percpu_alloc() that can be
>>>>>> used early enough.
>>>>> where is that fancy patch? current percpu_alloc(), will keep big 
>>>>> pointer in array..., instead of put that pointer in percpu_area
>>>>>
>>>>> 64bit has that after_bootmem already.
>>>> or at least introduce a "bootmem agnostic" allocator instead of 
>>>> open-coding the after_bootmem flag.
>>>>
>>>> Something like:
>>>>
>>>>   early_kzalloc()
>>>>
>>>> ?
>>>>
>>>> Andrew, any preferences?
>>> My mind reading ain't what it was, and this after_bootmem flag is
>>> write-only in this patch.
>>>
>>> So what's all this about?
>> if i use alloc_bootmem to get some memory, and later after_bootmem, 
>> can I use kfree to free it?
> 
> hm, no. If we used alloc_bootmem(), then we must not free it after 
> after_bootmem has been set.

ok, let keep irq_desc for legacy irqs not movable...

YH