On Fri, Jun 15, 2007 at 11:22:21AM +0200, Carsten Otte wrote:
quoted text
> Jared Hulbert wrote:
> >>If you're interrested in using the later for xip without
> >>struct page, I would volounteer to go ahead and implement this?
> >I'm very interested in this.
> Good. Let me see if I can come up with a patch on this.

That would be good.
 
quoted text
> >I'm not opposed to using struct page, but I'm confused as to how to
> >start that.  As I understand it, which is not well, defined a
> >CONFIG_DISCONTIGMEM region to cover the Flash memory would add that to
> >my pool of RAM.  That would be 'bad', right?  I don't see how to
> >create the page structs and set this memory aside as different.
>
> I fear I am not the right person to answer that question. In the good
> old days before discontigmem/sparse mem/vmem map where invented we used
> to have a hack for that in arch/. Heiko then decided my hack is a
> mess and came up with a good solution to the problem.

I didn't say your old code was a hack. It just didn't work together with
the vmem map approach, so it had to be converted. Otherwise there wouldn't
be a 1:1 kernel mapping or struct pages for your memory region.
If you can write code that doesn't need any struct pages that would make
life a bit easier, since we wouldn't need any pseudo memory hotplug code
that just adds struct pages.
We would still need to add the kernel mapping though.
-
unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/