On Fri, Jun 15, 2007 at 11:22:21AM +0200, Carsten Otte wrote: > 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. > >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. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
