On Tue, May 08, 2012 at 12:01:42AM +0200, Johannes Weiner wrote: > On Mon, May 07, 2012 at 10:41:13PM +0200, Sam Ravnborg wrote: > > Hi Johannes. > > > > > here are some (no)bootmem fixes and cleanups for 3.5. Most of it is > > > unifying allocation behaviour across bootmem and nobootmem when it > > > comes to respecting the specified allocation address goal and numa. > > > > > > But also refactoring the codebases of the two bootmem APIs so that we > > > can think about sharing code between them again. > > > > Could you check up on CONFIG_HAVE_ARCH_BOOTMEM use in bootmem.c too? > > x86 no longer uses bootmem.c > > avr define it - but to n. > > > > So no-one is actually using this anymore. > > I have sent patches to remove it from Kconfig for both x86 and avr. > > > > I looked briefly at cleaning up bootmem.c myslef - but I felt not > > familiar enough with the code to do the cleanup. > > > > I did not check your patchset - but based on the shortlog you > > did not kill HAVE_ARCH_BOOTMEM. > > It was used on x86-32 numa to try all bootmem allocations from node 0 > first (see only remaining definition of bootmem_arch_preferred_node), > which AFAICS nobootmem no longer respects. > > Shouldn't this be fixed instead? I do not know. Tejun / Yinghai? Sam -- 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>