On Sat, Apr 13, 2013 at 11:36:20PM +0800, Jiang Liu wrote: > Commit 600cc5b7f6 "mm: Kill NO_BOOTMEM version free_all_bootmem_node()" > has kill free_all_bootmem_node() for NO_BOOTMEM. > > Currently the usage pattern for free_all_bootmem_node() is like: > for_each_online_pgdat(pgdat) > free_all_bootmem_node(pgdat); > > It's equivalent to free_all_bootmem(), so this patchset goes one > step further to kill free_all_bootmem_node() for BOOTMEM too. > > This patchset also tries to clean up code and comments related to > VALID_PAGE() because it has been removed from kernel long time ago. > > Patch 1-11: > Kill free_all_bootmem_node() > Patch 12-16: > Clean up code and comments related to VALID_PAGE() > Patch 17: > Fix a minor build warning for m68k > Patch 18: > merge Alpha's mem_init() for UMA and NUMA. > Patch 19: > call register_page_bootmem_info_node() from mm core How does this not break bisection? Will a kernel still boot with patches 1-11 applied but not patch 19? As far as I can see such a kernel would have no memory available to it after mem_init() time and would therefore crash early in boot. Paul. -- 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>