On Thu, Jun 13, 2013 at 7:37 AM, Russell King - ARM Linux
wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 07:13:23PM -0700, Colin Cross wrote:
>> >From code inspection, I believe this will also improve block device
>> performance where the bounce limit was set to BLK_BOUNCE_HIGH, which
>> was bouncing
On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 07:13:23PM -0700, Colin Cross wrote:
> >From code inspection, I believe this will also improve block device
> performance where the bounce limit was set to BLK_BOUNCE_HIGH, which
> was bouncing unnecessarily for the top PHYS_PFN_OFFSET pages of low
> memory.
This has the
On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 07:13:23PM -0700, Colin Cross wrote:
From code inspection, I believe this will also improve block device
performance where the bounce limit was set to BLK_BOUNCE_HIGH, which
was bouncing unnecessarily for the top PHYS_PFN_OFFSET pages of low
memory.
This has the
On Thu, Jun 13, 2013 at 7:37 AM, Russell King - ARM Linux
li...@arm.linux.org.uk wrote:
On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 07:13:23PM -0700, Colin Cross wrote:
From code inspection, I believe this will also improve block device
performance where the bounce limit was set to BLK_BOUNCE_HIGH, which
was
On ARM max_pfn and max_low_pfn have always been relative to the
first valid PFN, apparently due to ancient kernels being unable
to properly handle physical memory at addresses other than 0.
A comment was added:
Note: max_low_pfn and max_pfn reflect the number of _pages_ in
the system, not
On ARM max_pfn and max_low_pfn have always been relative to the
first valid PFN, apparently due to ancient kernels being unable
to properly handle physical memory at addresses other than 0.
A comment was added:
Note: max_low_pfn and max_pfn reflect the number of _pages_ in
the system, not
6 matches
Mail list logo
