On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 01:35, Dave Hansen wrote: > Doing mem= for drivers isn't just a hack, it's *WRONG*. It's a ticking > time bomb that magically happens to work on some systems. It will not > work consistently on a discontiguous memory system, or a memory hotplug > system.
I couldn't agree more. Problem is I've been asked to change the way mem=X works on PPC64 so that this hack will work, which is a horrible thought. > Could you give some examples of drivers which are in the kernel that > could benefit from this patch? We don't tend to put things like this > in, unless they have actual users. We don't tend to change code for > out-of-tree users, either. No I can't. I've been approached by several "vendors" asking about using mem=X hacks on PPC64, however I doubt any of them have code in-tree. I'll check though. cheers
pgpoVUl47Rs9y.pgp
Description: PGP signature
