From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1760388AbYDCCXp (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 Apr 2008 22:23:45 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1758618AbYDCCXf (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 Apr 2008 22:23:35 -0400 Received: from smtp1.linux-foundation.org ([140.211.169.13]:58324 "EHLO smtp1.linux-foundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1758507AbYDCCXe (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 Apr 2008 22:23:34 -0400 Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2008 19:22:23 -0700 From: Andrew Morton To: yhlu.kernel@gmail.com Cc: Yinghai Lu , Ingo Molnar , Badari Pulavarty , michael@ellerman.id.au, Kamalesh Babulal , linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, Balbir Singh , kernel list Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: make mem_map allocation continuous v2. Message-Id: <20080402192223.5e8754a0.akpm@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: <200804021830.24563.yhlu.kernel@gmail.com> References: <200804021525.48799.yhlu.kernel@gmail.com> <20080402155247.5e746be7.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <86802c440804021744m7c6e3d94vcb6af3ebcaa71b5b@mail.gmail.com> <200804021830.24563.yhlu.kernel@gmail.com> X-Mailer: Sylpheed 2.4.8 (GTK+ 2.12.5; x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu) 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 On Wed, 2 Apr 2008 18:30:24 -0700 Yinghai Lu wrote: > v2 replace: > [PATCH] mm: make mem_map allocation continuous. > [PATCH] mm: allocate section_map for sparse_init > [PATCH] mm: allocate usemap at first instead of mem_map in sparse_init > err, no. > > diff --git a/mm/sparse.c b/mm/sparse.c > index f6a43c0..2881222 100644 > --- a/mm/sparse.c > +++ b/mm/sparse.c Sorry, but I'd rather not do it this way. We presently have this: mm-make-mem_map-allocation-continuous.patch mm-make-mem_map-allocation-continuous-checkpatch-fixes.patch mm-fix-alloc_bootmem_core-to-use-fast-searching-for-all-nodes.patch mm-allocate-section_map-for-sparse_init.patch mm-allocate-section_map-for-sparse_init-update.patch mm-allocate-section_map-for-sparse_init-update-fix.patch mm-allocate-section_map-for-sparse_init-powerpc-fix.patch mm-offset-align-in-alloc_bootmem.patch mm-make-reserve_bootmem-can-crossed-the-nodes.patch mm-make-reserve_bootmem-can-crossed-the-nodes-checkpatch-fixes.patch and you purport to throw some of them away and combine them into a single patch? We assume that the later patches will still apply and work on top of this newer patch? It is up to me to check that the replacement patch incorporates the third-party changes to the original patches? Too hard, too risky. Can't we just do a fix against 2.6.25-rc8-mm1?