On Wed, Jul 04, 2012 at 09:40:30AM +0800, Jiang Liu wrote: > > It's a bit ugly calling set_pageblock_order() from both sparse_init() > > and from free_area_init_core(). Can we find a single place from which > > to call it? It looks like here: > > > > --- a/init/main.c~a > > +++ a/init/main.c > > @@ -514,6 +514,7 @@ asmlinkage void __init start_kernel(void > > __stop___param - __start___param, > > -1, -1, &unknown_bootoption); > > > > + set_pageblock_order(); > > jump_label_init(); > > > > /* > > > > would do the trick? > > > > (free_area_init_core is __paging_init and set_pageblock_order() is > > __init. I'm too lazy to work out if that's wrong) > > Hi Andrew, > Thanks for you comments. Yes, this's an issue. > And we are trying to find a way to setup pageorder_block as > early as possible. Yinghai has suggested a good way for IA64, > but we still need help from PPC experts because PPC has the > same issue and I'm not familiar with PPC architecture. > We will submit another patch once we find an acceptable > solution here. I think it's overkill to try and do this on a per-architecture basis unless you are aware of a case where the per-architecture code cares about the value of pageblock_order. I find it implausible that the architecture needs to know the value very early in boot as pageblock_order is part of the arch-independent memory model. Andrew's suggestion seems reasonable to me once the section mess is figured out. -- 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>