On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 01:27:34PM +1100, Gavin Shan wrote: > >So the issue is only existing when CONFIG_NO_BOOTMEM=n. The alternative fix would > >be similar to what we have on !CONFIG_NO_BOOTMEM: In early stage, all page structs > >for bootmem reserved pages are initialized and mark them with PG_reserved. I'm > >not sure it's worthy to fix it as we won't support bootmem as Michael mentioned. > > > > Mel, could you please confirm if we need a fix on !CONFIG_NO_BOOTMEM? If we need, > I'll respin and send a patch for review. > Given that CONFIG_NO_BOOTMEM is not supported and bootmem is meant to be slowly retiring, I would suggest instead making deferred memory init depend on NO_BOOTMEM. -- Mel Gorman SUSE Labs -- 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>