From: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
To: sudaraja@codeaurora.org
Cc: Anshuman Khandual <anshuman.khandual@arm.com>,
Steven Price <steven.price@arm.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
Logan Gunthorpe <logang@deltatee.com>,
David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
pratikp@codeaurora.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm64/mm: add fallback option to allocate virtually contiguous memory
Date: Mon, 21 Sep 2020 18:43:15 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200921174313.GA3141@willie-the-truck> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <0101017479c7063b-aec9b77c-4f0f-41b6-84e6-f91a5ed1f3f6-000000@us-west-2.amazonses.com>
On Thu, Sep 10, 2020 at 08:48:40PM +0000, sudaraja@codeaurora.org wrote:
> On 2020-09-10 03:50, Anshuman Khandual wrote:
> > The proposed patch tried to mix both approaches. Regardless, the first
> > approach
> > here seems better and is the case in vmemmap_populate_hugepages()
> > implementation
> > on x86 as well.
>
> The 1st approach looks more cleaner compared to bailing out in first
> failure, unmapping all previously mapped sections and map entire request
> with vmemmap_populate_basepages. Thanks for the review and suggestion - will
> send over a cleaner patch soon.
Did you send an updated version of this? The threading has gone wonky in
my mail client, so I may have missed it.
Will
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
To: sudaraja@codeaurora.org
Cc: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
Anshuman Khandual <anshuman.khandual@arm.com>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Steven Price <steven.price@arm.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Logan Gunthorpe <logang@deltatee.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, pratikp@codeaurora.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm64/mm: add fallback option to allocate virtually contiguous memory
Date: Mon, 21 Sep 2020 18:43:15 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200921174313.GA3141@willie-the-truck> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <0101017479c7063b-aec9b77c-4f0f-41b6-84e6-f91a5ed1f3f6-000000@us-west-2.amazonses.com>
On Thu, Sep 10, 2020 at 08:48:40PM +0000, sudaraja@codeaurora.org wrote:
> On 2020-09-10 03:50, Anshuman Khandual wrote:
> > The proposed patch tried to mix both approaches. Regardless, the first
> > approach
> > here seems better and is the case in vmemmap_populate_hugepages()
> > implementation
> > on x86 as well.
>
> The 1st approach looks more cleaner compared to bailing out in first
> failure, unmapping all previously mapped sections and map entire request
> with vmemmap_populate_basepages. Thanks for the review and suggestion - will
> send over a cleaner patch soon.
Did you send an updated version of this? The threading has gone wonky in
my mail client, so I may have missed it.
Will
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-09-21 17:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <01010174769e2b68-a6f3768e-aef8-43c7-b357-a8cb1e17d3eb-000000@us-west-2.amazonses.com>
2020-09-10 6:45 ` [PATCH] arm64/mm: add fallback option to allocate virtually contiguous memory Anshuman Khandual
2020-09-10 6:45 ` Anshuman Khandual
2020-09-10 8:08 ` David Hildenbrand
2020-09-10 8:08 ` David Hildenbrand
2020-09-10 10:58 ` Anshuman Khandual
2020-09-10 10:58 ` Anshuman Khandual
2020-09-10 8:27 ` sudaraja
2020-09-10 11:16 ` Anshuman Khandual
2020-09-10 11:16 ` Anshuman Khandual
2020-09-10 8:27 ` sudaraja
2020-09-10 8:27 ` Steven Price
2020-09-10 8:27 ` Steven Price
2020-09-10 10:50 ` Anshuman Khandual
2020-09-10 10:50 ` Anshuman Khandual
2020-09-10 20:48 ` sudaraja
2020-09-21 17:43 ` Will Deacon [this message]
2020-09-21 17:43 ` Will Deacon
2020-09-10 20:48 ` sudaraja
2020-09-10 6:05 Sudarshan Rajagopalan
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2020-09-10 6:05 Sudarshan Rajagopalan
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20200921174313.GA3141@willie-the-truck \
--to=will@kernel.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=anshuman.khandual@arm.com \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=david@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=logang@deltatee.com \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=pratikp@codeaurora.org \
--cc=steven.price@arm.com \
--cc=sudaraja@codeaurora.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.