Re: [PATCH] x86-64: improve e820_search_gap()

["H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>]

Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>
>> So blindly locate it somewhere else?  How is that inherently better?
>> Wouldn't a machine with hotplug memory (which doesn't bother advertising
>> that fact so we can reserve the address space) be just as likely to use
>> a sparse memory space, since one can hardly expect the hardware to pack
>> the space (packing in hardware is why PCs generally have a
>> mostly-contiguous RAM space) when the memory is hotplugged?
> 
> Why blindly? Aren't hotpluggable memory ranges supposed to be reserved
> in the E820 map?
> 

That's was my reaction too... so I guess I'm misreading the patch.
Could you perhaps add a bit more to the description, specifically of
what policy your patch implements.

	-hpa

-- 
H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center
I work for Intel.  I don't speak on their behalf.