* Kirill A. Shutemov <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 08:18:53AM +0000, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >
> > * Kirill A. Shutemov <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > > On Tue, Oct 03, 2017 at 11:27:54AM +0300, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
> > > > On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 05:08:15PM +0300, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
> > > > > The first bunch of patches that prepare kernel to boot-time switching
> > > > > between paging modes.
> > > > >
> > > > > Please review and consider applying.
> > > >
> > > > Ping?
> > >
> > > Ingo, is there anything I can do to get review easier for you?
> >
> > Yeah, what is the conclusion on the sub-discussion of patch #2:
> >
> > [PATCH 2/6] mm/zsmalloc: Prepare to variable MAX_PHYSMEM_BITS
> >
> > ... do we want to skip it entirely and use the other 5 patches?
>
> Yes, please. MAX_PHYSMEM_BITS not variable yet in this part of the series.
>
> And I will post some version the patch in the next part, if it will be
> required.
Could we add TRULY_MAX_PHYSMEM_BITS (with a better name), to be used in places
where memory footprint is not a big concern?
Or, could we keep MAX_PHYSMEM_BITS constant, and introduce a _different_
constant
that is dynamic, and which could be used in the cases where the 5-level paging
config causes too much memory footprint in the common 4-level paging case?
Thanks,
Ingo
