"Aneesh Kumar K.V" writes:
> On 5/16/19 8:17 PM, Michael Ellerman wrote:
>> "Aneesh Kumar K.V" writes:
>>> This makes sure we don't enable HugeTLB if the cache is not configured.
>>> I am still not sure about this. IMHO hugetlb support should be a hardware
>>> support derivative and any cache
On 5/17/19 9:29 AM, Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote:
On 5/16/19 8:17 PM, Michael Ellerman wrote:
"Aneesh Kumar K.V" writes:
This makes sure we don't enable HugeTLB if the cache is not configured.
I am still not sure about this. IMHO hugetlb support should be a
hardware
support derivative and any
On 5/16/19 8:17 PM, Michael Ellerman wrote:
"Aneesh Kumar K.V" writes:
This makes sure we don't enable HugeTLB if the cache is not configured.
I am still not sure about this. IMHO hugetlb support should be a hardware
support derivative and any cache allocation failure should be handled as I
"Aneesh Kumar K.V" writes:
> This makes sure we don't enable HugeTLB if the cache is not configured.
> I am still not sure about this. IMHO hugetlb support should be a hardware
> support derivative and any cache allocation failure should be handled as I did
> in the earlier patch. But then if we
This makes sure we don't enable HugeTLB if the cache is not configured.
I am still not sure about this. IMHO hugetlb support should be a hardware
support derivative and any cache allocation failure should be handled as I did
in the earlier patch. But then if we were not able to create hugetlb page
