Message ID | 1647615920-23103-1-git-send-email-yangtiezhu@loongson.cn (mailing list archive) |
---|---|
Headers | show |
Series | MIPS: Modify early_parse_mem() | expand |
On 03/18/2022 11:05 PM, Tiezhu Yang wrote: > Tiezhu Yang (3): > MIPS: Return -EINVAL if mem parameter is empty in early_parse_mem() > MIPS: Return -EINVAL if mem parameter is invalid in early_parse_mem() > MIPS: Use memblock_add_node() in early_parse_mem() under CONFIG_NUMA > > arch/mips/kernel/setup.c | 35 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------ > 1 file changed, 29 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) > Hi Thomas, Any comments? Are you OK with these changes? https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mips/1647615920-23103-1-git-send-email-yangtiezhu@loongson.cn/T/#u Thanks, Tiezhu
On Mon, May 09, 2022 at 03:30:11PM +0800, Tiezhu Yang wrote: > > > On 03/18/2022 11:05 PM, Tiezhu Yang wrote: > > Tiezhu Yang (3): > > MIPS: Return -EINVAL if mem parameter is empty in early_parse_mem() > > MIPS: Return -EINVAL if mem parameter is invalid in early_parse_mem() > > MIPS: Use memblock_add_node() in early_parse_mem() under CONFIG_NUMA > > > > arch/mips/kernel/setup.c | 35 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------ > > 1 file changed, 29 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) > > > > Hi Thomas, > > Any comments? Are you OK with these changes? first and last patch are ok with me. The second patch changes semantics for mem=, which I don't want to change. Iirc the latest idea to solve your problem was to use mem=XX@ syntax to limit detected memory, which is the preferred way for me, too. If you want I'll take patch 1 and 3 out of this series. Thomas.
On 05/23/2022 09:28 PM, Thomas Bogendoerfer wrote: > On Mon, May 09, 2022 at 03:30:11PM +0800, Tiezhu Yang wrote: >> >> >> On 03/18/2022 11:05 PM, Tiezhu Yang wrote: >>> Tiezhu Yang (3): >>> MIPS: Return -EINVAL if mem parameter is empty in early_parse_mem() >>> MIPS: Return -EINVAL if mem parameter is invalid in early_parse_mem() >>> MIPS: Use memblock_add_node() in early_parse_mem() under CONFIG_NUMA >>> >>> arch/mips/kernel/setup.c | 35 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------ >>> 1 file changed, 29 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) >>> >> >> Hi Thomas, >> >> Any comments? Are you OK with these changes? > > first and last patch are ok with me. The second patch changes semantics > for mem=, which I don't want to change. Iirc the latest idea to solve > your problem was to use mem=XX@ syntax to limit detected memory, which > is the preferred way for me, too. > > If you want I'll take patch 1 and 3 out of this series. > > Thomas. > OK, thank you. Let me rebase and send v2 later. Thanks, Tiezhu