On Wed, Jan 04, 2012 at 04:31:52PM -0500, David Miller wrote: > From: Sam Ravnborg <sam@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2012 21:45:16 +0100 > > > sparc32 uses a combination of a local memory handling and bootmem > > to handle memory in the early stage of the boot. > > > > Some time ago I started to look at what was required to replace > > the local memory handling (sp_banks) with memblock - which I understood > > was the generic way to handle memory in the early phases of > > the boot. > > > > Tejun have posted a nice series of patches that clean up > > memblock so it should be possible to replace bootmem too. > > You are extremely brave to be messing around with this area of > the sparc32 port, I must say :-) Getting sparc64 sane took a s/brave/stupid/g > lot of concentrated effort and it lacks much of the baggage that > sparc32 still has lying around. But then sparc32 looks much simpler than sparc64 - especially after I start to get the bigger picture. > > Thanks for doing this work and I'll continue looking over the > patch and try to help with the unresolved areas as well. Thanks! I plan to post a more readable serie of patches soon after the merge window has closed. Sam -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe sparclinux" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
