On 26.1.2016 8:38, Joonsoo Kim wrote: > On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 03:37:06PM -0800, Laura Abbott wrote: >> >> Is that series going to conflict with the work done for ZONE_DEVICE or run >> into similar problems? >> 033fbae988fcb67e5077203512181890848b8e90 (mm: ZONE_DEVICE for "device memory") >> has commit text about running out of ZONE_SHIFT bits and needing to get >> rid of ZONE_DMA instead so it seems like ZONE_CMA would run into the same >> problem. > > Hmm... I'm not sure. I need a investigation. What I did before is > enlarging section size. Then, number of section is reduced and we need > less section bit in struct page's flag. This worked for my sparsemem > configuration but I'm not sure other conguration. Perhaps, in other > congifuration, we can limit node bits and max number of node. This seems to be a solution proposed for the ZONE_DMA and ZONE_DEVICE coexistence https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/1/25/1233 It wouldn't help with ZONE_CMA, so I guess it's time to look for a more robust one. > Thanks. > > -- > To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in > the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM, > see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . > Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a> > -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>