From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752557Ab2EHR5v (ORCPT ); Tue, 8 May 2012 13:57:51 -0400 Received: from smtp.snhosting.dk ([87.238.248.203]:50114 "EHLO smtp.domainteam.dk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752084Ab2EHR5u (ORCPT ); Tue, 8 May 2012 13:57:50 -0400 Date: Tue, 8 May 2012 19:57:48 +0200 From: Sam Ravnborg To: Johannes Weiner Cc: Andrew Morton , Gavin Shan , David Miller , Yinghai Lu , Tejun Heo , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [patch 00/10] (no)bootmem bits for 3.5 Message-ID: <20120508175748.GA11906@merkur.ravnborg.org> References: <1336390672-14421-1-git-send-email-hannes@cmpxchg.org> <20120507204113.GD10521@merkur.ravnborg.org> <20120507220142.GA1202@cmpxchg.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20120507220142.GA1202@cmpxchg.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, May 08, 2012 at 12:01:42AM +0200, Johannes Weiner wrote: > On Mon, May 07, 2012 at 10:41:13PM +0200, Sam Ravnborg wrote: > > Hi Johannes. > > > > > here are some (no)bootmem fixes and cleanups for 3.5. Most of it is > > > unifying allocation behaviour across bootmem and nobootmem when it > > > comes to respecting the specified allocation address goal and numa. > > > > > > But also refactoring the codebases of the two bootmem APIs so that we > > > can think about sharing code between them again. > > > > Could you check up on CONFIG_HAVE_ARCH_BOOTMEM use in bootmem.c too? > > x86 no longer uses bootmem.c > > avr define it - but to n. > > > > So no-one is actually using this anymore. > > I have sent patches to remove it from Kconfig for both x86 and avr. > > > > I looked briefly at cleaning up bootmem.c myslef - but I felt not > > familiar enough with the code to do the cleanup. > > > > I did not check your patchset - but based on the shortlog you > > did not kill HAVE_ARCH_BOOTMEM. > > It was used on x86-32 numa to try all bootmem allocations from node 0 > first (see only remaining definition of bootmem_arch_preferred_node), > which AFAICS nobootmem no longer respects. > > Shouldn't this be fixed instead? I do not know. Tejun / Yinghai? Sam