On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 5:50 PM, Yinghai Lu <yinghai@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Now you put back bootmem calling early, will cause confusion. [...] > we should use adding memblock_alloc calling instead... go backward... Okay, I'm convinced. I've updated my series so CONFIG_PRINTK_PERSIST only works with HAVE_MEMBLOCK, and I've removed the patch to unconditionally call bootmem in the existing non-PRINTK_PERSIST case. (I'll upload the patches later once the other threads play out.) Thanks for the quick feedback! Avery -- 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/ . Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/ Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>