On 04/07/2014 12:36 PM, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 07, 2014 at 12:27:10PM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>> On 04/07/2014 11:28 AM, Mel Gorman wrote:
>>>
>>> I had considered the soft-dirty tracking usage of the same bit. I thought
>>> I'd
>>> be able to swizzle around it or a further worst case of having soft-dirty
>>> and
>>> automatic NUMA balancing mutually exclusive. Unfortunately upon examination
>>> it's not obvious how to have both of them share a bit and I suspect any
>>> attempt to will break CRIU. In my current tree, NUMA_BALANCING cannot be
>>> set if MEM_SOFT_DIRTY which is not particularly satisfactory. Next on the
>>> list is examining if _PAGE_BIT_IOMAP can be used.
>>
>> Didn't we smoke the last user of _PAGE_BIT_IOMAP?
>
> Seems so, at least for non-kernel pages (not considering this bit references
> in
> xen code, which i simply don't know but i guess it's used for kernel pages
> only).
>
David Vrabel has a patchset which I presumed would be pulled through the
Xen tree this merge window:
[PATCHv5 0/8] x86/xen: fixes for mapping high MMIO regions (and remove
_PAGE_IOMAP)
That frees up this bit.
-hpa
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
