Re: [PATCH 1/4] x86_64: Switch to SPARSE_VIRTUAL

[Martin Bligh]

Christoph Lameter wrote:
> On Mon, 2 Apr 2007, Dave Hansen wrote:
>
> > I completely agree, it looks like it should be faster.  The code
> > certainly has potential benefits.  But, to add this neato, apparently
> > more performant feature, we unfortunately have to add code.  Adding the
> > code has a cost: code maintenance.  This isn't a runtime cost, but it is
> > a real, honest to goodness tradeoff.
>
> Its just the opposite. The vmemmap code is so efficient that we can remove 
> lots of other code and gops of these alternate implementations. On x86_64 
> its even superior to FLATMEM since FLATMEM still needs a memory reference 
> for the mem_map area. So if we make SPARSE standard for all 
> configurations then there is no need anymore for FLATMEM DISCONTIG etc 
> etc. Can we not cleanup all this mess? Get rid of all the gazillions 
> of #ifdefs please? This would ease code maintenance significantly. I hate 
> having to constantly navigate my way through all the alternatives.

The original plan when this was first merged was pretty much that -
for sparsemem to replace discontigmem once it was well tested. Seems
to have got stalled halfway through ;-(

Not sure we'll get away with replacing flatmem for all arches, but
we could at least get rid of discontigmem, it seems.

M.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/