2012/4/3 Marek Szyprowski :
> Hi,
>
> This is (yet another) update of CMA patches. I've rebased them onto
> recent v3.4-rc1 kernel tree and integrated some minor bugfixes. The
> first issue has been pointed by Sandeep Patil - alloc_contig_range
> reclaimed two times too many pages, second issue (po
On Apr 19, 2012, at 2:40 PM, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Tue, 03 Apr 2012 16:10:05 +0200
> Marek Szyprowski wrote:
>
>> This is (yet another) update of CMA patches.
>
> Looks OK to me. It's a lot of code.
>
> Please move it into linux-next, and if all is well, ask Linus to pull
> the tree into
Marek,
diff --git a/Documentation/kernel-parameters.txt
b/Documentation/kernel-parameters.txt
index c1601e5..669e8bb 100644
--- a/Documentation/kernel-parameters.txt
+++ b/Documentation/kernel-parameters.txt
@@ -508,6 +508,11 @@ bytes respectively. Such letter suffixes can also be
entirely omitt
Hi Andrew,
On Thursday, April 19, 2012 9:41 PM Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Tue, 03 Apr 2012 16:10:05 +0200
> Marek Szyprowski wrote:
>
> > This is (yet another) update of CMA patches.
>
> Looks OK to me. It's a lot of code.
>
> Please move it into linux-next, and if all is well, ask Linus to p
On Tue, 03 Apr 2012 16:10:05 +0200
Marek Szyprowski wrote:
> This is (yet another) update of CMA patches.
Looks OK to me. It's a lot of code.
Please move it into linux-next, and if all is well, ask Linus to pull
the tree into 3.5-rc1. Please be sure to cc me on that email.
I suggest that you
Hello all,
I'm using CMA to malloc contiguous memory, and I have following failure:
__alloc_contig_migrate_range: test_pages_isolated(3bc00, 3c000) failed
I try to dump_page, it shows:
page:81778620 count:1 mapcount:0 mapping: (null) index:0x88b
page flags: 0x4000()
since I am not familiar
Hi,
On Tuesday, April 10, 2012 7:20 PM Sandeep Patil wrote:
> >> This is (yet another) update of CMA patches.
> >
> >
> > How well CMA is supposed to work if you have mlocked processes? I've
> > been testing these patches, and noticed that by creating a small mlocked
> > process you start to get
>>
>> This is (yet another) update of CMA patches.
>
>
> How well CMA is supposed to work if you have mlocked processes? I've
> been testing these patches, and noticed that by creating a small mlocked
> process you start to get plenty of test_pages_isolated() failure warnings,
> and bigger allocati
Hi,
On Tue, 3 Apr 2012, Marek Szyprowski wrote:
This is (yet another) update of CMA patches.
How well CMA is supposed to work if you have mlocked processes? I've
been testing these patches, and noticed that by creating a small mlocked
process you start to get plenty of test_pages_isolated() fa
Hi,
This is (yet another) update of CMA patches. I've rebased them onto
recent v3.4-rc1 kernel tree and integrated some minor bugfixes. The
first issue has been pointed by Sandeep Patil - alloc_contig_range
reclaimed two times too many pages, second issue (possible mismatch
between pageblock size
10 matches
Mail list logo
