mbox series

[v2,0/2] Introduce common code for risc-v sparsemem support

Message ID 20181107205433.3875-1-logang@deltatee.com (mailing list archive)
Headers show
Series Introduce common code for risc-v sparsemem support | expand

Message

Logan Gunthorpe Nov. 7, 2018, 8:54 p.m. UTC 
These are the first two common patches in my series to introduce
sparsemem support to RISC-V. The full series was posted last cycle
here [1] and the latest version can be found here [2].

As recommended by Palmer, I'd like to get the changes to common code
merged and then I will pursue the cleanups in the individual arches (arm,
arm64, and sh) as well as add the new feature to riscv.

I would suggest we merge these two patches through Andrew's mm tree.

Thanks,

Logan

[1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20181015175702.9036-1-logang@deltatee.com/T/#u
[2] https://github.com/sbates130272/linux-p2pmem.git riscv-sparsemem-v4

--

Changes in v2:
 * Added a comment documenting the awkwardly named memblocks_present()
   function, as suggested by Andrew.

--

Logan Gunthorpe (2):
  mm: Introduce common STRUCT_PAGE_MAX_SHIFT define
  mm/sparse: add common helper to mark all memblocks present

 arch/arm64/include/asm/memory.h |  9 ---------
 arch/arm64/mm/init.c            |  8 --------
 include/asm-generic/fixmap.h    |  1 +
 include/linux/mm_types.h        |  5 +++++
 include/linux/mmzone.h          |  6 ++++++
 mm/sparse.c                     | 16 ++++++++++++++++
 6 files changed, 28 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)

--
2.19.0

Comments

Palmer Dabbelt Nov. 14, 2018, 6:06 p.m. UTC | #1 
On Wed, 07 Nov 2018 12:54:31 PST (-0800), logang@deltatee.com wrote:
> These are the first two common patches in my series to introduce
> sparsemem support to RISC-V. The full series was posted last cycle
> here [1] and the latest version can be found here [2].
>
> As recommended by Palmer, I'd like to get the changes to common code
> merged and then I will pursue the cleanups in the individual arches (arm,
> arm64, and sh) as well as add the new feature to riscv.
>
> I would suggest we merge these two patches through Andrew's mm tree.

I haven't seen any review on this.  It looks fine to me, but I'm not qualified 
to review it as I don't really know anything about core MM stuff -- and I 
certainly don't feel comfortable taking this through my tree.

I've To'd linux-mm, hopefully it just got lost in the shuffle during the merge 
window.