Re: [patch 2/2] bootmem: Node-setup agnostic free_bootmem()

[Johannes Weiner]

Andi Kleen <andi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

> Andrew Morton wrote:
>> On Sun, 13 Apr 2008 18:56:57 +0200 Andi Kleen <andi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> 
>>> Johannes Weiner <hannes@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>>>
>>>> Make free_bootmem() look up the node holding the specified address
>>>> range which lets it work transparently on single-node and multi-node
>>>> configurations.
>>> Acked-by: Andi Kleen <andi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>
>>> This is far better than the original change it replaces and which 
>>> I also objected to in review.
>>>
>> 
>> So...  do we think these two patches are sufficiently safe and important for
>> 2.6.25?
>
> It's only strictly needed for .26 I think for some (also slightly
> dubious) changes queued in git-x86.

Does anything yet rely on this new free_bootmem() behaviour?  If not,
the safest thing would be to just revert the original patch in mainline
and drop the second patch completely.

	Hannes
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/