On 2012-12-9 16:10, Tang Chen wrote: > Hi Liu, Wu, > > On 12/06/2012 10:26 AM, Jiang Liu wrote: >> On 2012-12-6 9:26, Tang Chen wrote: >>> On 12/05/2012 11:43 PM, Jiang Liu wrote: >>>> If we make "movablecore_map" take precedence over "movablecore/kernelcore", >>>> the logic could be simplified. I think it's not so attractive to support >>>> both "movablecore_map" and "movablecore/kernelcore" at the same time. > > Thanks for the advice of removing movablecore/kernelcore. But since we > didn't plan to do this in the beginning, and movablecore/kernelcore are > more user friendly, I think for now, I'll handle DMA and low memory address problems as you mentioned, and just keep movablecore/kernelcore > in the next version. :) Hi Tang, I mean we could ignore kernelcore/movablecore if user specifies both movablecore_map and kernelcore/movablecore in the kernel command line. I'm not suggesting to get rid of kernelcore/movablecore:) Thanks! > > And about the SRAT, I think it is necessary to many users. I think we > should provide both interfaces. I may give a try in the next version. > > Thanks. :) > > > . > -- 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>