From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756399Ab1BXTcY (ORCPT ); Thu, 24 Feb 2011 14:32:24 -0500 Received: from mx2.mail.elte.hu ([157.181.151.9]:50927 "EHLO mx2.mail.elte.hu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756262Ab1BXTcX (ORCPT ); Thu, 24 Feb 2011 14:32:23 -0500 Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2011 20:32:11 +0100 From: Ingo Molnar To: Yinghai Lu Cc: Tejun Heo , tglx@linutronix.de, hpa@zytor.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, David Rientjes Subject: Re: [GIT PULL tip:x86/mm] Message-ID: <20110224193211.GC15498@elte.hu> References: <20110224145128.GM7840@htj.dyndns.org> <4D66AC9C.6080500@kernel.org> <20110224192305.GB15498@elte.hu> <4D66B176.9030300@kernel.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4D66B176.9030300@kernel.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-08-17) X-ELTE-SpamScore: -2.0 X-ELTE-SpamLevel: X-ELTE-SpamCheck: no X-ELTE-SpamVersion: ELTE 2.0 X-ELTE-SpamCheck-Details: score=-2.0 required=5.9 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=no SpamAssassin version=3.2.5 -2.0 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org * Yinghai Lu wrote: > On 02/24/2011 11:23 AM, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > > * Yinghai Lu wrote: > > > >> On 02/24/2011 06:51 AM, Tejun Heo wrote: > >>> Ingo, please pull from the following git branch to receive four > >>> commits from Yinghai. HEAD is d1b19426b0 (x86: Rename e820_table_* to > >>> pgt_buf_*). > >>> > >>> The first three separate nobootmem code into mm/nobootmem.c and the > >>> last one renames e820_table_* variables to pgt_buf_*. All four > >>> patches are cleanups and shouldn't cause any behavior difference. > >>> > >>> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tj/misc.git x86-mm > >>> > >>> As usual, if HEAD doesn't appear, please pull from master. > >>> > >>> ssh://master.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tj/misc.git x86-mm > >>> > >>> Thanks. > >>> > >>> Yinghai Lu (4): > >>> bootmem: Separate out CONFIG_NO_BOOTMEM code into nobootmem.c > >>> bootmem: Move contig_page_data definition to bootmem.c/nobootmem.c > >>> bootmem: Move __alloc_memory_core_early() to nobootmem.c > >>> x86: Rename e820_table_* to pgt_buf_* > >>> > >>> arch/x86/include/asm/init.h | 6 +- > >>> arch/x86/mm/init.c | 20 +- > >>> arch/x86/mm/init_32.c | 8 +- > >>> arch/x86/mm/init_64.c | 4 +- > >>> arch/x86/xen/mmu.c | 2 +- > >>> include/linux/mm.h | 2 - > >>> mm/Makefile | 8 +- > >>> mm/bootmem.c | 180 +----------------- > >>> mm/nobootmem.c | 435 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > >>> mm/page_alloc.c | 37 ---- > >>> 10 files changed, 472 insertions(+), 230 deletions(-) > >>> create mode 100644 mm/nobootmem.c > >>> > >> > >> better to put first three into seperate branch. and it is with core code. > >> something like tip/mm > >> > >> So will not pollute tip/x86/mm. and they can be pushed separately. > > > > Well, realistically they will be tested together and will go to Linus under the > > x86/mm label anyway, so there's little reason to keep them separate at this point. > > > > So i've pulled them. Thanks guys! > > DavidR reported that x86/mm broke his numa emulation with 128M etc. That regression needs to be fixed. Tejun, do you know about that bug? Thanks, Ingo