Re: [PATCH] Tight check of pfn_valid on sparsemem - v4

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Hi, Kame.

On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 5:13 PM, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
<kamezawa.hiroyu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> Perhaps the mem_section array.  Using a symbol that is part of
>> the model pre-checks can remove a global symbol lookup and has the side
>> effect of making sure our pfn_valid is for the right model.
>>
>
> But yes, maybe it's good to make use of a fixed-(magic)-value.

fixed-magic-value?
Yes. It can be good for some debugging.
But as Christoph pointed out, we need some strict check(ex,
PG_reserved) for preventing unlucky valid using of magic value in
future.
But in fact I have a concern to use PG_reserved since it can be used
afterward pfn_valid normally to check hole in non-hole system. So I
think it's redundant.

Hmm..

-- 
Kind regards,
Minchan Kim

--
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


[Index of Archives]     [Linux ARM Kernel]     [Linux ARM]     [Linux Omap]     [Fedora ARM]     [IETF Annouce]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux]     [Linux OMAP]     [Linux MIPS]     [ECOS]     [Asterisk Internet PBX]     [Linux API]