From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from e5.ny.us.ibm.com (e5.ny.us.ibm.com [32.97.182.145]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "e5.ny.us.ibm.com", Issuer "Equifax" (verified OK)) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 75E49B70D0 for ; Tue, 5 Oct 2010 01:45:23 +1100 (EST) Received: from d01relay05.pok.ibm.com (d01relay05.pok.ibm.com [9.56.227.237]) by e5.ny.us.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.13.1) with ESMTP id o94EP4BW025936 for ; Mon, 4 Oct 2010 10:25:04 -0400 Received: from d01av03.pok.ibm.com (d01av03.pok.ibm.com [9.56.224.217]) by d01relay05.pok.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id o94EjJ4m124468 for ; Mon, 4 Oct 2010 10:45:19 -0400 Received: from d01av03.pok.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d01av03.pok.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.13.1/NCO v10.0 AVout) with ESMTP id o94EjI1m013778 for ; Mon, 4 Oct 2010 11:45:19 -0300 Message-ID: <4CA9E87A.3000807@austin.ibm.com> Date: Mon, 04 Oct 2010 09:45:14 -0500 From: Nathan Fontenot MIME-Version: 1.0 To: balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 7/9] v3 Define memory_block_size_bytes for powerpc/pseries References: <4CA62700.7010809@austin.ibm.com> <4CA62A0A.4050406@austin.ibm.com> <20101003175500.GE7896@balbir.in.ibm.com> <20101003180731.GT14064@sgi.com> <1286129461.9970.1.camel@nimitz> <20101003182701.GI7896@balbir.in.ibm.com> In-Reply-To: <20101003182701.GI7896@balbir.in.ibm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: Greg KH , steiner@sgi.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Dave Hansen , linux-mm@kvack.org, Robin Holt , linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On 10/03/2010 01:27 PM, Balbir Singh wrote: > * Dave Hansen [2010-10-03 11:11:01]: > >> On Sun, 2010-10-03 at 13:07 -0500, Robin Holt wrote: >>> On Sun, Oct 03, 2010 at 11:25:00PM +0530, Balbir Singh wrote: >>>> * Nathan Fontenot [2010-10-01 13:35:54]: >>>> >>>>> Define a version of memory_block_size_bytes() for powerpc/pseries such that >>>>> a memory block spans an entire lmb. >>>> >>>> I hope I am not missing anything obvious, but why not just call it >>>> lmb_size, why do we need memblock_size? >>>> >>>> Is lmb_size == memblock_size after your changes true for all >>>> platforms? >>> >>> What is an lmb? I don't recall anything like lmb being referred to in >>> the rest of the kernel. >> >> Heh. It's the OpenFirmware name for a Logical Memory Block. Basically >> what we use to determine the SECTION_SIZE on powerpc. Probably not the >> best terminology to use elsewhere in the kernel. > > Agreed for the kernel, this patch was for powerpc/pseries, hence was > checking in this context. > I don't really see a reason to name it lmb_size, it seems easier to stick with the naming used by the rest of the kernel. -Nathan