From: Wen Congyang <wency@cn.fujitsu.com>
To: richard -rw- weinberger <richard.weinberger@gmail.com>
Cc: x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, Rob Landley <rob@landley.net>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
bhelgaas@google.com, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
Yasuaki Ishimatsu <isimatu.yasuaki@jp.fujitsu.com>,
KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] update mem= option's spec according to its implementation
Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2012 19:00:38 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <508E61D6.3080101@cn.fujitsu.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAFLxGvyOo065sc2QeTkFsPotJbJEgEAV_ktvz5Z2gYpD-Ft7WA@mail.gmail.com>
At 10/29/2012 06:48 PM, richard -rw- weinberger Wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 9:48 AM, Wen Congyang <wency@cn.fujitsu.com> wrote:
>> Current mem= implementation seems buggy because specification and
>> implementation doesn't match. Current mem= has been working
>> for many years and it's not buggy, it works as expected. So
>> we should update the specification.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Wen Congyang <wency@cn.fujitsu.com>
>> Sort-of-tentatively-acked-by: Rob Landley <rob@landley.net>
>
> So, is this an ACK or not?
>
I don't know.
Here is the origin message:
At 06/15/2012 04:22 AM, Rob Landley Wrote:
> I have no objection to this but can't confirm it's true or not without
> an awful lot more digging through the code I don't have time for right
> now. (All the x86-32 machines I've used just had the 640k->1m hole and
> the rest was contiguous memory, so the behavior would be the same either
> way...)
>
> Sort-of-tentatively-acked-by: Rob Landley <rob@landley.net>
>
> Rob
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-10-29 10:54 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-10-29 8:48 [PATCH v3 0/2] fixes for mem= option Wen Congyang
2012-10-29 8:48 ` [PATCH v3 1/2] update mem= option's spec according to its implementation Wen Congyang
2012-10-29 10:48 ` richard -rw- weinberger
2012-10-29 11:00 ` Wen Congyang [this message]
2012-10-29 8:48 ` [PATCH v3 2/2] x86: make 'mem=' option to work for efi platform Wen Congyang
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=508E61D6.3080101@cn.fujitsu.com \
--to=wency@cn.fujitsu.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=isimatu.yasuaki@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=richard.weinberger@gmail.com \
--cc=rob@landley.net \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).