On 09/24/2013 09:27 PM, Tejun Heo wrote: > On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 09:23:48PM +0800, Zhang Yanfei wrote: >>> Hmm... so, this is kinda weird. We're doing it in two chunks and >>> mapping memory between ISA_END_ADDRESS and kernel_end right on top of >>> ISA_END_ADDRESS? Can't you give enough information to the mapping >>> function so that it can map everything on top of kernel_end in single >>> go? >> >> You mean we should call memory_map_bottom_up like this: >> >> memory_map_bottom_up(ISA_END_ADDRESS, end) >> >> right? > > But that wouldn't be ideal as we want the page tables above kernel > image and the above would allocate it above ISA_END_ADDRESS, right? The original idea is we will allocate everything above the kernel. So the pagetables for [ISA_END_ADDRESS, kernel_end) will be also located above the kernel. > Maybe memory_map_bottom_up() should take extra parameters for where to > allocate page tables at separately from the mapping range and treat it > specially? Would that make the function a lot more complex? Hmmmm...I will try to see if it is complex. Thanks. > > Thanks. > -- Thanks. Zhang Yanfei -- 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>