On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 09:04:21PM +0100, Tomasz Figa wrote: > > > On 11.02.2014 21:02, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > >On Tue, 2014-02-11 at 19:01 +0000, Grant Likely wrote: > > > >>>except that the former IMHO better suits the definition of memory > >>>region, which I see as a single contiguous range of memory and can be > >>>simplified to have a single reg entry per region. > >> > >>My point is rather if multiple reg tuples are found in a reserved memory > >>node, the kernel must respect them and reserve the memory. I'm not > >>arguing about whether or not that makes for a good binding. > > > >agreed. > > My point is why, if the binding defines that just a single tuple should be > provided. FWIW, the usecase I had mentioned in reply to Grant in the patch 5/5 thread [1] could make use of this. The shared memory region is split into a main chunk and several "auxiliary" chunk, but collectively these regions all share the same heap state. Josh 1: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20140205192502.GO20228@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx -- Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, hosted by The Linux Foundation -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-doc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
