Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753780Ab0GMIHS (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Jul 2010 04:07:18 -0400 Received: from fgwmail6.fujitsu.co.jp ([192.51.44.36]:47352 "EHLO fgwmail6.fujitsu.co.jp" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751693Ab0GMIHO (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Jul 2010 04:07:14 -0400 X-SecurityPolicyCheck-FJ: OK by FujitsuOutboundMailChecker v1.3.1 Date: Tue, 13 Jul 2010 17:02:22 +0900 From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki To: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki Cc: Russell King - ARM Linux , Minchan Kim , Yinghai Lu , "H. Peter Anvin" , Andrew Morton , Shaohua Li , Yakui Zhao , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, kgene.kim@samsung.com, Mel Gorman Subject: Re: [RFC] Tight check of pfn_valid on sparsemem Message-Id: <20100713170222.9369e649.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> In-Reply-To: <20100713165808.e340e6dc.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> References: <20100712155348.GA2815@barrios-desktop> <20100713121947.612bd656.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> <20100713132312.a7dfb100.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> <20100713072009.GA19839@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <20100713163417.17895202.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> <20100713165808.e340e6dc.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> Organization: FUJITSU Co. LTD. X-Mailer: Sylpheed 3.0.3 (GTK+ 2.10.14; i686-pc-mingw32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1149 Lines: 30 On Tue, 13 Jul 2010 16:58:08 +0900 KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote: > On Tue, 13 Jul 2010 16:34:17 +0900 > KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote: > > > Anyway, sparsemem is designed to be aligned to SECTION_SIZE of memmap. > > Please avoid adding new Spaghetti code without proper configs. > > Thanks, > > Ok, I realized I misunderstand all. Arm doesn't unmap memmap but reuse the page > for memmap without modifing ptes. My routine only works when ARM uses sparsemem_vmemmap. > But yes, it isn't. > > Hmm...How about using pfn_valid() for FLATMEM or avoid using SPARSEMEM ? > If you want conrols lower than SPARSEMEM, FLATMEM works better because ARM unmaps memmap. allocation of memmap in lower granule than SPARSEMEM. How about stop using SPARSEMEM ? What's the benefit ? It just eats up memory for mem_section[]. Sorry, -Kame -- 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/