Re: [ALTERNATE PATCH] memblock: fix min_low_pfn/max_low_pfn build errors
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
- To: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [ALTERNATE PATCH] memblock: fix min_low_pfn/max_low_pfn build errors
- From: Mike Rapoport <rppt@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 30 Aug 2020 12:56:48 +0300
- Cc: linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, kernel test robot <lkp@xxxxxxxxx>, David Rientjes <rientjes@xxxxxxxxxx>, linux-mm@xxxxxxxxx, Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Michal Simek <monstr@xxxxxxxxx>, Michal Simek <michal.simek@xxxxxxxxxx>, Tony Luck <tony.luck@xxxxxxxxx>, Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@xxxxxxxxx>, linux-ia64@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- In-reply-to: <a0665bb7-3389-1178-0a79-2155fb88255d@infradead.org>
- References: <20200829000139.2513-1-rdunlap@infradead.org> <20200829130429.GG167163@linux.ibm.com> <a0665bb7-3389-1178-0a79-2155fb88255d@infradead.org>
Hi Randy,
On Sat, Aug 29, 2020 at 08:40:51AM -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote:
> On 8/29/20 6:04 AM, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> > On Fri, Aug 28, 2020 at 05:01:39PM -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote:
> >> Export min_low_pfn & max_low_pfn in mm/memblock.c to fix build errors
> >> on arch/microblaze/ and arch/ia64/: (e.g.)
> >
> > Please don't. This would give driver developers a wrong impression that
> > these variables can be used to query memory boundaries, but this is not
> > the case, at least not on all architectures.
> >
> > I would prefer fixing it up locally for microblaze and ia64.
>
> I did that.
> and that's why this is labeled as an ALTERNATE PATCH.
I've seen that, I just wanted to make sure that Andrew wouldn't pick
this one :)
I can help with taking microblaze and ia64 patches via memblock tree
once we have Acks from the arch maintainers.
> thanks.
> --
> ~Randy
>
--
Sincerely yours,
Mike.
[Index of Archives]
[Linux Kernel]
[Sparc Linux]
[DCCP]
[Linux ARM]
[Yosemite News]
[Linux SCSI]
[Linux x86_64]
[Linux for Ham Radio]