Re: [PATCH 1/2] x86: use memblock_alloc_range() or memblock_alloc_base()

[Akinobu Mita]

2014-08-28 5:53 GMT+09:00 Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
> On Sun, 24 Aug 2014 23:56:02 +0900 Akinobu Mita <akinobu.mita@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> Replace memblock_find_in_range() and memblock_reserve() with
>> memblock_alloc_range() or memblock_alloc_base().
>
> Please spend a little more time preparing the changelogs?

OK, I'll be careful next time.

> Why are we making this change?  Because memblock_alloc_range() is
> equivalent to memblock_find_in_range()+memblock_reserve() and it's just
> a cleanup?  Or is there some deeper functional reason?

This is just a cleanup and I thought there are no functional change.
But I've just realized that the conversion to memblock_alloc_base() in
this patch changes the behaviour in the error case.
Because memblock_alloc_base calls panic if it can't allocate.

So please drop this patch from -mm tree for now.

> Does memblock_find_in_range() need to exist?  Can we convert all
> callers to memblock_alloc_range()?

There are two callsites where we can't simply convert with
memblock_alloc_range (arch/s390/kernel/setup.c, arch/x86/mm/init.c).
--
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/