On Wed, 2009-10-14 at 00:04 +0200, Ralf Baechle wrote: > On Sat, Oct 10, 2009 at 12:02:10AM +0800, Wu Zhangjin wrote: > > > The above patch can not fix the problem when enabled FLATMEM in > > linux-2.6.32-rc3, the real problem should be that we need register the > > "pci memory space" as nosave pages, and also, the above "reserved"(not > > memory) pages should be registered as nosave pages. but the simpler > > solution should be the pfn_valid() I sent out in this E-mail thread, we > > just need to check whether they are "valid", if they are "System > > RAM"(BOOT_MEM_RAM or BOOT_MEM_ROM_DATA), they should be valid. > > > > and what's more? should be register "pci memory space" as nosave pages > > for all architecture? > > No. You only see this problem because your PCI memory space is between > the lowest and the highest memory address. Other systems don't have this > issue because they either use the discontig or sparse memory models. > > Btw, for systems that actually have memory in the 90000000-bfffffff range > and are running a 64-bit kernel with 4k ages the flatmem memory model > will waste 28MB of RAM; with 16k pages it's still 7MB. > > Time to say gooebye to flatmem? Okay, I will enable SPARSEMEM by default in the defconfig later. Regards, Wu Zhangjin
