On 02/02/2016 04:22 PM, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
>>
>> Should it be possible to resuse free_init_pages() and/or
>> free_reserved_area() only for routines (members in the array in this
>> case of a struct of fns) that don't meet our subarch once we're done
>> iterating over the routies and know we can discard things we know we
>> can drop? Through a cursory glance, *I think* its possible as-is, we
>> would just need easy access to the respective start and end addresses
>> and I guess there lies the challenge. Question is, is would that be
>> clean enough for us? Or are there other things you can think of that
>> perhaps might make this prospect cleaner later to add?
>>
>> I figure better ask now for architectural purposes than later after merged.
>
> I don't think its needed we iron out in a solution *now* to be able to
> free code we know we won't need at run time but having a solid
> understanding adding this feature later without much impact to users
> might be worthy. As such I was pursuing a very basic proof of concept
> to ensure this is possible first given I didn't hear back if folks
> were sure this might be possible. I don't think a proof of concept
> should take long so just want to get fleshed out.
>
This applies to the specific subarch use rather than generic linker
tables, right?
-hpa
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
