On Fri, 2010-07-16 at 13:23 -0500, Nathan Fontenot wrote: > > If the memory_block's state was inferred to be the same as each > > memory_block_section, couldn't we just keep a start and end phys_index > > in the memory_block, and get away from having memory_block_sections at > > all? > > Oooohhh... I like. Looking at the code it appears this is possible. I'll > try this out and include it in the next version of the patch. > > Do you think we need to add an additional file to each memory block directory > to indicate the number of memory sections in the memory block that are actually > present? I think it's easiest to just say that each 'memory_block' can only hold contiguous 'memory_block_sections', and we give either the start/end or start/length pairs. It gets a lot more complicated if we have to deal with lots of holes. I can just see the hardware designers reading this thread, with their Dr. Evil laughs trying to come up with a reason to give us a couple of terabytes of RAM with only every-other 16MB area populated. :) -- Dave -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxx For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>