Re: [GIT PULL] scheduler fixes

[Yinghai Lu]

Ingo Molnar wrote:
> 
> Ok, i think this all looks pretty realistic - but there's quite a 
> bit of layering on top of pending changes in the x86 and irq trees. 
> We could do this on top of those topic branches in -tip, and rebase 
> in the merge window. Or delay it to .32.

would have move setup_per_cpu_areas after mem_init().
some kind of limiting bootmem related in setup_arch()

> 
> ... plus i think we are _very_ close to being able to remove all of 
> bootmem on x86 (with some compatibility/migration mechanism in 
> place). Which bootmem calls do we have before kmalloc init with 
> Pekka's patch applied? I think it's mostly the page table init code.

need to decide what should be in setup_arch_mem, or setup_arch_rest().
before initmem_init() ==>  setup_arch_mem
after initmem_init()
	reserve_bootmem related should stay in setup_arch_mem
try to move other call in setup_arch to _reset after ane setup_arch_rest will
be called after mem_init()

>  
> ( beyond the page allocator internal use - where we could use 
>   straight e820 based APIs that clip memory off from the beginning 
>   of existing e820 RAM ranges - enriched with NUMA/SRAT locality 
>   info. )

yes. it is there. need to dynamic early_res array.

YH
--
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/