On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 8:48 AM, Alexander Duyck <alexander.duyck@xxxxxxxxx> 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'll buy the inline argument for keeping the new routine in page_alloc.c, but I otherwise do not see the divergence danger or "making __init_single_page() available for anybody" given the the declaration is limited in scope to a mm/ local header file.
