* m68k Kconfig warning @ 2019-11-27 1:27 Randy Dunlap 2019-11-27 7:12 ` Geert Uytterhoeven 0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread From: Randy Dunlap @ 2019-11-27 1:27 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Geert Uytterhoeven, linux-m68k, LKML Hi Geert, Just noticed this. I don't know what the right fix is. Would you take care of it, please? on Linux 5.4, m68k allmodconfig: WARNING: unmet direct dependencies detected for NEED_MULTIPLE_NODES Depends on [n]: DISCONTIGMEM [=n] || NUMA Selected by [y]: - SINGLE_MEMORY_CHUNK [=y] && MMU [=y] thanks. -- ~Randy Reported-by: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org> ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: m68k Kconfig warning 2019-11-27 1:27 m68k Kconfig warning Randy Dunlap @ 2019-11-27 7:12 ` Geert Uytterhoeven 2019-12-02 11:42 ` Kars de Jong 0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread From: Geert Uytterhoeven @ 2019-11-27 7:12 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Randy Dunlap; +Cc: linux-m68k, LKML Hi Randy, On Wed, Nov 27, 2019 at 2:27 AM Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org> wrote: > Just noticed this. I don't know what the right fix is. > Would you take care of it, please? > > on Linux 5.4, m68k allmodconfig: > > WARNING: unmet direct dependencies detected for NEED_MULTIPLE_NODES > Depends on [n]: DISCONTIGMEM [=n] || NUMA > Selected by [y]: > - SINGLE_MEMORY_CHUNK [=y] && MMU [=y] This has been basically there forever, but working. Gr{oetje,eeting}s, Geert -- Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that. -- Linus Torvalds ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: m68k Kconfig warning 2019-11-27 7:12 ` Geert Uytterhoeven @ 2019-12-02 11:42 ` Kars de Jong 2019-12-02 13:32 ` Geert Uytterhoeven 0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread From: Kars de Jong @ 2019-12-02 11:42 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Geert Uytterhoeven; +Cc: Randy Dunlap, linux-m68k, LKML Hi Geert & Randy, Op wo 27 nov. 2019 om 08:12 schreef Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>: > On Wed, Nov 27, 2019 at 2:27 AM Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org> wrote: > > Just noticed this. I don't know what the right fix is. > > Would you take care of it, please? > > > > on Linux 5.4, m68k allmodconfig: > > > > WARNING: unmet direct dependencies detected for NEED_MULTIPLE_NODES > > Depends on [n]: DISCONTIGMEM [=n] || NUMA > > Selected by [y]: > > - SINGLE_MEMORY_CHUNK [=y] && MMU [=y] > > This has been basically there forever, but working. The reason for SINGLE_MEMORY_CHUNK depending on NEED_MULTIPLE_NODES is historic due to the way it is implemented. I played with it this weekend and I got a working version of FLATMEM, which can replace SINGLE_MEMORY_CHUNK. I'll clean it up and send a patch later this week. A possible next step might be to replace DISCONTIGMEM with SPARSEMEM (since DISCONTIGMEM has been deprecated). Kind regards, Kars. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: m68k Kconfig warning 2019-12-02 11:42 ` Kars de Jong @ 2019-12-02 13:32 ` Geert Uytterhoeven 2019-12-02 16:01 ` Mike Rapoport 0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread From: Geert Uytterhoeven @ 2019-12-02 13:32 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Kars de Jong; +Cc: Randy Dunlap, Mike Rapoport, linux-m68k, LKML Hi Kars,. On Mon, Dec 2, 2019 at 12:42 PM Kars de Jong <karsdejong@home.nl> wrote: > Op wo 27 nov. 2019 om 08:12 schreef Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>: > > On Wed, Nov 27, 2019 at 2:27 AM Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org> wrote: > > > Just noticed this. I don't know what the right fix is. > > > Would you take care of it, please? > > > > > > on Linux 5.4, m68k allmodconfig: > > > > > > WARNING: unmet direct dependencies detected for NEED_MULTIPLE_NODES > > > Depends on [n]: DISCONTIGMEM [=n] || NUMA > > > Selected by [y]: > > > - SINGLE_MEMORY_CHUNK [=y] && MMU [=y] > > > > This has been basically there forever, but working. > > The reason for SINGLE_MEMORY_CHUNK depending on NEED_MULTIPLE_NODES is > historic due to the way it is implemented. > I played with it this weekend and I got a working version of FLATMEM, > which can replace SINGLE_MEMORY_CHUNK. Nice, thanks! > step might be to replace DISCONTIGMEM with SPARSEMEM (since > DISCONTIGMEM has been deprecated). Mike Rapoport has patches for that: "[PATCH v2 0/3] m68k/mm: switch from DISCONTIGMEM to SPARSEMEM" Unfortunately they're not on lore, and there were some issues with them. Gr{oetje,eeting}s, Geert -- Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that. -- Linus Torvalds ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: m68k Kconfig warning 2019-12-02 13:32 ` Geert Uytterhoeven @ 2019-12-02 16:01 ` Mike Rapoport 2019-12-04 11:58 ` Kars de Jong 0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread From: Mike Rapoport @ 2019-12-02 16:01 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Geert Uytterhoeven; +Cc: Kars de Jong, Randy Dunlap, linux-m68k, LKML On Mon, Dec 02, 2019 at 02:32:28PM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > Hi Kars,. > > On Mon, Dec 2, 2019 at 12:42 PM Kars de Jong <karsdejong@home.nl> wrote: > > Op wo 27 nov. 2019 om 08:12 schreef Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>: > > > On Wed, Nov 27, 2019 at 2:27 AM Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org> wrote: > > > > Just noticed this. I don't know what the right fix is. > > > > Would you take care of it, please? > > > > > > > > on Linux 5.4, m68k allmodconfig: > > > > > > > > WARNING: unmet direct dependencies detected for NEED_MULTIPLE_NODES > > > > Depends on [n]: DISCONTIGMEM [=n] || NUMA > > > > Selected by [y]: > > > > - SINGLE_MEMORY_CHUNK [=y] && MMU [=y] > > > > > > This has been basically there forever, but working. > > > > The reason for SINGLE_MEMORY_CHUNK depending on NEED_MULTIPLE_NODES is > > historic due to the way it is implemented. > > I played with it this weekend and I got a working version of FLATMEM, > > which can replace SINGLE_MEMORY_CHUNK. > > Nice, thanks! > > > step might be to replace DISCONTIGMEM with SPARSEMEM (since > > DISCONTIGMEM has been deprecated). > > Mike Rapoport has patches for that: > "[PATCH v2 0/3] m68k/mm: switch from DISCONTIGMEM to SPARSEMEM" > > Unfortunately they're not on lore, and there were some issues with them. The patches are here: https://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-m68k/msg13588.html Aside from some technicalities we had troubles deciding what should be the section size. With larger section size we might end up with wasted memory for memory maps and with smaller section size we'll have to limit the addressable physical memory... > Gr{oetje,eeting}s, > > Geert > > -- > Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org > > In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But > when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that. > -- Linus Torvalds -- Sincerely yours, Mike. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: m68k Kconfig warning 2019-12-02 16:01 ` Mike Rapoport @ 2019-12-04 11:58 ` Kars de Jong 0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread From: Kars de Jong @ 2019-12-04 11:58 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Mike Rapoport; +Cc: Geert Uytterhoeven, Randy Dunlap, linux-m68k, LKML Hi Mike! Op ma 2 dec. 2019 om 17:01 schreef Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.ibm.com>: > The patches are here: > https://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-m68k/msg13588.html > > Aside from some technicalities we had troubles deciding what should be the > section size. With larger section size we might end up with wasted memory > for memory maps and with smaller section size we'll have to limit the > addressable physical memory... I read through that thread. I believe our current page->flags needs 22 bits for the normal FLAGS and 2 bits for the ZONES, which leaves 8 bits for the SECTION. This is what Geert found out (it worked with MAX_PHYSMEM_BITS = 30 and SECTION_SIZE_BITS = 22). I think we can reduces ZONES to a single bit. We currently put all memory in ZONE_DMA, so I think we might just as well put it in ZONE_NORMAL and disable ZONE_DMA. That would enable us to have 8 MB sections and use the full 32-bit address space, correct? That may be a working compromise? Kind regards, Kars. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2019-12-04 11:59 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2019-11-27 1:27 m68k Kconfig warning Randy Dunlap 2019-11-27 7:12 ` Geert Uytterhoeven 2019-12-02 11:42 ` Kars de Jong 2019-12-02 13:32 ` Geert Uytterhoeven 2019-12-02 16:01 ` Mike Rapoport 2019-12-04 11:58 ` Kars de Jong
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).