ense to keep it in here.
>
Yes, this make sense to me now.
>(and I think at least for now it makes sense to not squash patch 1 and
>2, to easier discuss the new user interface/concept introduced in this
>patch).
>
>Thanks!
>
>--
>
>Thanks,
>
>David / dhildenb
al Hocko
>Cc: Dan Williams
>Cc: "Kirill A. Shutemov"
>Cc: Oscar Salvador
>Cc: Nicholas Piggin
>Cc: Stephen Rothwell
>Cc: Christophe Leroy
>Cc: "Jonathan Neusch??fer"
>Cc: Mauricio Faria de Oliveira
>Cc: Vasily Gorbik
>Cc: Arun KS
>Cc: Ro
block.
>+ *
>+ * MEMORY_BLOCK_BOOT:
>+ * This memory block was added during boot by the basic system. No
>+ * specific device driver takes care of this memory block. This memory
>+ * block type is onlined automatically by the kernel during boot and might
>+ * later be managed by a different device driver, in which case the type
>+ * might change.
>+ */
>+enum {
>+ MEMORY_BLOCK_NONE = 0,
>+ MEMORY_BLOCK_UNSPECIFIED,
>+ MEMORY_BLOCK_BOOT,
>+};
>+
> /* These states are exposed to userspace as text strings in sysfs */
> #define MEM_ONLINE (1<<0) /* exposed to userspace */
> #define MEM_GOING_OFFLINE (1<<1) /* exposed to userspace */
>--
>2.17.2
--
Wei Yang
Help you, Help me
___
devel mailing list
de...@linuxdriverproject.org
http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
k types. Turns out abstracting too much was
> rather confusing and not helpful. Properly document them.
>
>Notes:
>- I wanted to convert the enum of types into a named enum but this
> provoked all kinds of different errors. For now, I am doing
On Thu, Oct 11, 2018 at 6:05 PM Vlastimil Babka wrote:
>
> On 10/10/18 6:56 PM, Arun KS wrote:
> > On 2018-10-10 21:00, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
> >> On 10/5/18 10:10 AM, Arun KS wrote:
> >>> When free pages are done with higher order, time spend on
> >>> coalescing pages by buddy allocator can be
On Tue, May 08, 2018 at 08:11:23PM +0800, Baoquan He wrote:
>On 05/08/18 at 08:48pm, Wei Yang wrote:
>> On Mon, May 07, 2018 at 09:14:29AM +0800, Baoquan He wrote:
>> >Hi Wei Yang,
>> >
>> >On 04/26/18 at 09:18am, Wei Yang wrote:
>> >> On Thu, Ap
On Mon, May 07, 2018 at 09:14:29AM +0800, Baoquan He wrote:
>Hi Wei Yang,
>
>On 04/26/18 at 09:18am, Wei Yang wrote:
>> On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 08:18:46AM +0800, Baoquan He wrote:
>> >The struct resource uses singly linked list to link siblings. It's not
>> >easy t
proposal of resource reverse iteration without changing current
design.
>From 5d7145d44fe48b98572a03884fa3a3aa82e3cef9 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Wei Yang <richard.weiy...@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 24 Mar 2018 23:25:46 +0800
Subject: [PATCH] kernel/resource: add walk_system_ram_res_rev()
As
in the tree and W is the average number of siblings of each
resource.
And this approach doesn't need to change current structure.
>
>That's why I would like to have a try of the list_head linking.
>
--
Wei Yang
Help you, Help me
___
devel mailing list
de...@linuxdriverproject.org
http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
