Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754091AbaFPHEs (ORCPT ); Mon, 16 Jun 2014 03:04:48 -0400 Received: from e28smtp09.in.ibm.com ([122.248.162.9]:47299 "EHLO e28smtp09.in.ibm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753865AbaFPHEr (ORCPT ); Mon, 16 Jun 2014 03:04:47 -0400 From: "Aneesh Kumar K.V" To: Joonsoo Kim Cc: Andrew Morton , Marek Szyprowski , Michal Nazarewicz , Minchan Kim , Russell King - ARM Linux , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Paolo Bonzini , Gleb Natapov , Alexander Graf , Benjamin Herrenschmidt , Paul Mackerras , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org, kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 00/10] CMA: generalize CMA reserved area management code In-Reply-To: <20140616053209.GG23210@js1304-P5Q-DELUXE> References: <1402543307-29800-1-git-send-email-iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com> <87r42seyvg.fsf@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20140616053209.GG23210@js1304-P5Q-DELUXE> User-Agent: Notmuch/0.18~rc0+2~gbc64cdc (http://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/24.3.91.1 (x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu) Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2014 12:34:14 +0530 Message-ID: <87tx7lcp3l.fsf@linux.vnet.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-TM-AS-MML: disable X-Content-Scanned: Fidelis XPS MAILER x-cbid: 14061607-2674-0000-0000-0000006E43CA Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Joonsoo Kim writes: > On Sat, Jun 14, 2014 at 12:55:39PM +0530, Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote: >> Joonsoo Kim writes: >> >> > Currently, there are two users on CMA functionality, one is the DMA >> > subsystem and the other is the kvm on powerpc. They have their own code >> > to manage CMA reserved area even if they looks really similar. >> > From my guess, it is caused by some needs on bitmap management. Kvm side >> > wants to maintain bitmap not for 1 page, but for more size. Eventually it >> > use bitmap where one bit represents 64 pages. >> > >> > When I implement CMA related patches, I should change those two places >> > to apply my change and it seem to be painful to me. I want to change >> > this situation and reduce future code management overhead through >> > this patch. >> > >> > This change could also help developer who want to use CMA in their >> > new feature development, since they can use CMA easily without >> > copying & pasting this reserved area management code. >> > >> > v2: >> > Although this patchset looks very different with v1, the end result, >> > that is, mm/cma.c is same with v1's one. So I carry Ack to patch 6-7. >> > >> > Patch 1-5 prepare some features to cover ppc kvm's requirements. >> > Patch 6-7 generalize CMA reserved area management code and change users >> > to use it. >> > Patch 8-10 clean-up minor things. >> >> >> I wanted to test the ppc changes and found that the patch series doesn't apply >> against v3.15 . Do you have a kernel tree which I can clone to test this >> series ? > > This is based on linux-next -next-20140610. > And my tree is on following link. > > https://github.com/JoonsooKim/linux/tree/cma-general-v2.0-next-20140610 > > But, I think I'm late, because you have already added a Tested-by tag. linux-next kexec is broken on ppc64, hence I hand picked few of dependent patches for dma CMA on top of 3.15 and used that for testing. -aneesh -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/