From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from mailout2.w1.samsung.com ([210.118.77.12]:18044 "EHLO mailout2.w1.samsung.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754217Ab1GKNYP (ORCPT ); Mon, 11 Jul 2011 09:24:15 -0400 Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2011 15:24:08 +0200 From: Marek Szyprowski Subject: RE: [PATCHv11 0/8] Contiguous Memory Allocator In-reply-to: <20110706151112.5c619431.akpm@linux-foundation.org> To: 'Andrew Morton' , 'Arnd Bergmann' Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-media@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linaro-mm-sig@lists.linaro.org, 'Michal Nazarewicz' , 'Kyungmin Park' , 'KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki' , 'Ankita Garg' , 'Daniel Walker' , 'Mel Gorman' , 'Jesse Barker' , 'Jonathan Corbet' , 'Chunsang Jeong' Message-id: <001d01cc3fcd$d082a450$7187ecf0$%szyprowski@samsung.com> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-language: pl Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT References: <1309851710-3828-1-git-send-email-m.szyprowski@samsung.com> <201107051407.17249.arnd@arndb.de> <20110706151112.5c619431.akpm@linux-foundation.org> List-ID: Sender: Hello, On Thursday, July 07, 2011 12:11 AM Andrew Morton wrote: > On Tue, 5 Jul 2011 14:07:17 +0200 > Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > > On Tuesday 05 July 2011, Marek Szyprowski wrote: > > > This is yet another round of Contiguous Memory Allocator patches. I > hope > > > that I've managed to resolve all the items discussed during the Memory > > > Management summit at Linaro Meeting in Budapest and pointed later on > > > mailing lists. The goal is to integrate it as tight as possible with > > > other kernel subsystems (like memory management and dma-mapping) and > > > finally merge to mainline. > > > > You have certainly addressed all of my concerns, this looks really good > now! > > > > Andrew, can you add this to your -mm tree? What's your opinion on the > > current state, do you think this is ready for merging in 3.1 or would > > you want to have more reviews from core memory management people? > > > > My reviews were mostly on the driver and platform API side, and I think > > we're fine there now, but I don't really understand the impacts this has > > in mm. > > I could review it and put it in there on a preliminary basis for some > runtime testing. But the question in my mind is how different will the > code be after the problems which rmk has identified have been fixed? > > If "not very different" then that effort and testing will have been > worthwhile. The issue reported by Russell is very ARM specific and can be solved mostly in arch/arm/mm/dma-mapping.c, maybe with some minor changes/helpers in drivers/base/dma-contiguous.c The core part in linux/mm probably won't be affected by these changes at all. Best regards -- Marek Szyprowski Samsung Poland R&D Center