On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 8:54 AM Pasha Tatashin <Pavel.Tatashin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On 9/12/18 11:48 AM, Alexander Duyck wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 6:59 AM Pasha Tatashin > > <Pavel.Tatashin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > >> Hi Alex, > > > > Hi Pavel, > > > >> Please re-base on linux-next, memmap_init_zone() has been updated there > >> compared to mainline. You might even find a way to unify some parts of > >> memmap_init_zone and memmap_init_zone_device as memmap_init_zone() is a > >> lot simpler now. > > > > This patch applied to the linux-next tree with only a little bit of > > fuzz. It looks like it is mostly due to some code you had added above > > the function as well. I have updated this patch so that it will apply > > to both linux and linux-next by just moving the new function to > > underneath memmap_init_zone instead of above it. > > > >> I think __init_single_page() should stay local to page_alloc.c to keep > >> the inlining optimization. > > > > I agree. In addition it will make pulling common init together into > > one space easier. I would rather not have us create an opportunity for > > things to further diverge by making it available for anybody to use. > > > >> I will review you this patch once you send an updated version. > > > > Other than moving the new function from being added above versus below > > there isn't much else that needs to change, at least for this patch. I > > have some follow-up patches I am planning that will be targeted for > > linux-next. Those I think will focus more on what you have in mind in > > terms of combining this new function > > Hi Alex, > > I'd like see the combining to be part of the same series. May be this > patch can be pulled from this series and merged with your upcoming > patches series? > > Thank you, > Pavel The problem is the issue is somewhat time sensitive, and the patches I put out in this set needed to be easily backported. That is one of the reasons this patch set is as conservative as it is. I was hoping to make 4.20 with this patch set at the latest. My follow-up patches are more of what I would consider 4.21 material as it will be something we will probably want to give some testing time, and I figure there will end up being a few revisions. I would probably have them ready for review in another week or so. Thanks. - Alex
