From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.3 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_MUTT autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EA623C43144 for ; Wed, 27 Jun 2018 10:12:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C7DD261DC for ; Wed, 27 Jun 2018 10:12:17 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 9C7DD261DC Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.vnet.ibm.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753404AbeF0KMO (ORCPT ); Wed, 27 Jun 2018 06:12:14 -0400 Received: from mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com ([148.163.158.5]:58864 "EHLO mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753238AbeF0KMM (ORCPT ); Wed, 27 Jun 2018 06:12:12 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (m0098419.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.22/8.16.0.22) with SMTP id w5R9xJcJ115612 for ; Wed, 27 Jun 2018 06:12:12 -0400 Received: from e06smtp05.uk.ibm.com (e06smtp05.uk.ibm.com [195.75.94.101]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 2jv6asxhrx-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Wed, 27 Jun 2018 06:12:06 -0400 Received: from localhost by e06smtp05.uk.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Wed, 27 Jun 2018 11:11:50 +0100 Received: from b06cxnps4075.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (9.149.109.197) by e06smtp05.uk.ibm.com (192.168.101.135) with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted; (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256/256) Wed, 27 Jun 2018 11:11:48 +0100 Received: from d06av21.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06av21.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.105.232]) by b06cxnps4075.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id w5RABldI26935460 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=FAIL); Wed, 27 Jun 2018 10:11:47 GMT Received: from d06av21.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9EB2352050; Wed, 27 Jun 2018 11:11:39 +0100 (BST) Received: from rapoport-lnx (unknown [9.148.8.118]) by d06av21.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0C3F552054; Wed, 27 Jun 2018 11:11:38 +0100 (BST) Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2018 13:11:44 +0300 From: Mike Rapoport To: Rob Herring Cc: mhocko@kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, hannes@cmpxchg.org, Andrew Morton , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: why do we still need bootmem allocator? References: <20180625140754.GB29102@dhcp22.suse.cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 x-cbid: 18062710-0020-0000-0000-0000029F76B2 X-IBM-AV-DETECTION: SAVI=unused REMOTE=unused XFE=unused x-cbparentid: 18062710-0021-0000-0000-000020EBF4A3 Message-Id: <20180627101144.GC4291@rapoport-lnx> X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:,, definitions=2018-06-27_02:,, signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1015 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxscore=0 impostorscore=0 mlxlogscore=585 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1806210000 definitions=main-1806270115 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Jun 25, 2018 at 10:09:41AM -0600, Rob Herring wrote: > On Mon, Jun 25, 2018 at 8:08 AM Michal Hocko wrote: > > > > Hi, > > I am wondering why do we still keep mm/bootmem.c when most architectures > > already moved to nobootmem. Is there any fundamental reason why others > > cannot or this is just a matter of work? > > Just because no one has done the work. I did a couple of arches > recently (sh, microblaze, and h8300) mainly because I broke them with > some DT changes. I have a patch for alpha nearly ready. That leaves m68k and ia64 > > Btw. what really needs to be > > done? Btw. is there any documentation telling us what needs to be done > > in that regards? > > No. The commits converting the arches are the only documentation. It's > a bit more complicated for platforms that have NUMA support. > > Rob > -- Sincerely yours, Mike.