Re: [Linux-nvdimm] [PATCH 1/2] x86: add support for the non-standard protected e820 type

From: Boaz Harrosh <boaz@plexistor.com>
To: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@kernel.org>
Cc: Toshi Kani <toshi.kani@hp.com>, Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>,
	linux-nvdimm@ml01.01.org,
	the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@kernel.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Subject: Re: [Linux-nvdimm] [PATCH 1/2] x86: add support for the non-standard protected e820 type
Date: Mon, 06 Apr 2015 10:16:54 +0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <552232E6.1040105@plexistor.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAE9FiQWbqPZk4_+y2F2cAxnM0SrYcQJsnbfQ+TVFotn5Cda5HA@mail.gmail.com>

On 04/05/2015 11:06 PM, Yinghai Lu wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 5, 2015 at 2:18 AM, Boaz Harrosh <boaz@plexistor.com> wrote:
<>
>> Hi Yinghai, Toshi
>>
>> In my old patches I did not have these updates as well, and everything
>> was very much usable, for a long time.
>>
>> However. I actually liked these changes in Christoph's patches and
>> thought they should stay, here is why.
>>
>> Today I will be sending patches to make pmem be supported with
>> page-struct as an optional alternative to the use of ioremap.
>> This is for advanced users that wants to RDMA direct_IO and so
>> on directly out of pmem.
> 
> but it is not related.  Should just remove those lines.
> 
> And even his original changes about memblock is not needed.
> 

Never mind. Has I said it hit us once in the passed but do to
a bug. I do not mind you can remove the max_pfn thing I can do
without it.

Thanks
Boaz

> | You did not modify memblock_x86_fill() to treat
> | E820_PRAM as E820_RAM, so memblock will not have any
> | entry for E820_PRAM, so you do not need to call memblock_reserve
> | there.
> |
> | And the same time, init_memory_mapping() will call
> | init_range_memory_mapping/for_each_mem_pfn_range() to
> | set kernel mapping for memory range in memblock only.
> | So here calling init_memory_mapping will not do anything.
> | then just drop calling to that init_memory_mapping.
> | --- so will not kernel mapping pmem, is that what you intended to have?
> |
> | After those two changes, You do not need this reserve_pmem at all.
> | Just drop it.
> 