Re: [PATCH 01/14] x86, ACPI, mm: Kill max_low_pfn_mapped

[H. Peter Anvin]

The problem is that the code will be broken, and so it makes no sense.  The #if 0 is really confusing.

Daniel Vetter <daniel@xxxxxxxx> wrote:

>On Thu, Mar 07, 2013 at 10:09:26PM -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>> On 03/07/2013 09:28 PM, Tejun Heo wrote:
>> > On Thu, Mar 7, 2013 at 9:27 PM, Yinghai Lu <yinghai@xxxxxxxxxx>
>wrote:
>> >> They are not using memblock_find_in_range(), so 1ULL<< will not
>help.
>> >>
>> >> Really hope i915 drm guys could clean that hacks.
>> > 
>> > The code isn't being used.  Just leave it alone.  Maybe add a
>comment.
>> >  The change is just making things more confusing.
>> > 
>> 
>> Indeed, but...
>> 
>> Daniel: can you guys clean this up or can we just remove the #if 0
>clause?
>
>I guess we could just put this into a comment explaining where stolen
>memory for the gfx devices is at on gen2. But tbh I don't mind if we
>just
>keep the #if 0 code around. For all newer platforms we can get at that
>offset through mch bar registers, so I don't really care.
>-Daniel

-- 
Sent from my mobile phone. Please excuse brevity and lack of formatting.
--
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/