Re: [PATCH 4/6] Have x86_64 use add_active_range() and free_area_init_nodes

> Anyway.  From the implementation I can see what the code is doing.  But I
> see no description of what it is _supposed_ to be doing.  (The process of
> finding differences between these two things is known as "debugging").  I
> could kludge things by setting MAX_ACTIVE_REGIONS to 1000000, but enough. 
> I look forward to the next version ;)

Or we could just keep the working old code.

Can somebody remind me what this patch kit was supposed to fix or improve again? 

-Andi
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [PATCH 4/6] Have x86_64 use add_active_range() and free_area_init_nodes
  - From: Mel Gorman <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 4/6] Have x86_64 use add_active_range() and free_area_init_nodes
  - From: Andrew Morton <[email protected]>

References:
- [PATCH 0/6] Sizing zones and holes in an architecture independent manner V6
  - From: Mel Gorman <[email protected]>
- [PATCH 4/6] Have x86_64 use add_active_range() and free_area_init_nodes
  - From: Mel Gorman <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 4/6] Have x86_64 use add_active_range() and free_area_init_nodes
  - From: Andrew Morton <[email protected]>

Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH 0/9] namespaces: Introduction
Next by Date: Re: 2.6.17-rc4-mm2 (hard lockup after resume from disk on AMD64)
Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH 4/6] Have x86_64 use add_active_range() and free_area_init_nodes
Next by thread: Re: [PATCH 4/6] Have x86_64 use add_active_range() and free_area_init_nodes
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

[Index of Archives] [Kernel Newbies] [Netfilter] [Bugtraq] [Photo] [Stuff] [Gimp] [Yosemite News] [MIPS Linux] [ARM Linux] [Linux Security] [Linux RAID] [Video 4 Linux] [Linux for the blind] [Linux Resources]