On 14/10/2015 01:12, Stephen Hemminger wrote: > On Tue, 14 Jul 2015 09:57:04 +0100 > Sergio Gonzalez Monroy <sergio.gonzalez.monroy at intel.com> wrote: > >> Current implemetation allows reserving/creating memzones but not the opposite >> (unreserve/free). This affects mempools and other memzone based objects. >> >> From my point of view, implementing free functionality for memzones would >> look >> like malloc over memsegs. >> Thus, this approach moves malloc inside eal (which in turn removes a circular >> dependency), where malloc heaps are composed of memsegs. >> We keep both malloc and memzone APIs as they are, but memzones allocate its >> memory by calling malloc_heap_alloc. >> Some extra functionality is required in malloc to allow for boundary >> constrained >> memory requests. >> In summary, currently malloc is based on memzones, and with this approach >> memzones are based on malloc. >> >> v8: >> - Rebase against current HEAD to factor for changes made by new Tile-Gx >> arch > Following rules in kernel. You need to fix the 32 bit build and resubmit whole > series. > > Thomas, this patchset should be marked "Changes requested" in patchwork. The v10 patchset was applied in 2.1.
Could you elaborate on the issue? I can build without errors for target i686-native-linuxapp-gcc Sergio
