Hello, On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 07:33:40PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Wednesday, April 13, 2011, Linus Torvalds > <torva...@linux-foundation.org> wrote: > > On Wednesday, April 13, 2011, H. Peter Anvin <h...@zytor.com> wrote: > >> > >> Yes. However, even if we *do* revert (and the time is running short on > >> not reverting) I would like to understand this particular one, simply > >> because I think it may very well be a problem that is manifesting itself > >> in other ways on other systems. > > sorry, fingerfart. Anyway, I agree 100%. > > we definitely want to also understand the reason for things not > working, even if we do revert..
There were (and still are) places where memblock callers implemented ad-hoc top-down allocation by stepping down start limit until allocation succeeds. Several of them have been removed since top-down became the default behavior, so simply reverting the commit is likely to cause subtle issues. Maybe the best approach is introducing @topdown parameter and use it selectively for pure memory allocations. Thanks. -- tejun _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
