[PATCH 2/2] rheap: move rheap.c from arch/powerpc/lib/ to lib/
qiang.zhao at freescale.com
Thu Jul 9 16:14:08 AEST 2015
On Wed, 2015-07-09 at 02:09PM -0500, Wood Scott wrote:
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Wood Scott-B07421
> Sent: Thursday, July 09, 2015 2:09 PM
> To: Zhao Qiang-B45475
> Cc: linuxppc-dev at lists.ozlabs.org; Xie Xiaobo-R63061
> Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] rheap: move rheap.c from arch/powerpc/lib/ to
> On Thu, 2015-07-09 at 01:05 -0500, Zhao Qiang-B45475 wrote:
> > On Wed, 2015-07-09 at 11:51 -0500, Wood Scott wrote:
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Wood Scott-B07421
> > > Sent: Thursday, July 09, 2015 11:51 AM
> > > To: Zhao Qiang-B45475
> > > Cc: linuxppc-dev at lists.ozlabs.org; Xie Xiaobo-R63061
> > > Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] rheap: move rheap.c from arch/powerpc/lib/
> > > to lib/
> > >
> > > That doesn't involve a different alignment for each allocation. It
> > > uses the same alignment for all of them, and the alignment that
> > > cpm_common.c provides to rh_init() is 1 byte.
> > >
> > > ...but sigh, cpm_muram_alloc() is changing cpm_muram_info.alignment
> > > behind the rheap code's back. Despite the existence of
> > >
> > > So yes, add aligned allocation functionality to genalloc, but don't
> > > duplicate
> > > gen_pool_alloc() to do so. Instead, rename gen_pool_alloc() to
> > > gen_pool_alloc_align() with an alignment parameter (also modifying
> > > the algo function to take an alignment arg, which
> > > gen_pool_first_fit_order_align() would ignore), and provide a
> > Here, I don’t understand how to handle the algo In your mind.
> > Can you explain more detailly?
> The algorithms would be unchanged except that they would receive a new
> alignment (or alignment mask) parameter. gen_pool_first_fit_order_align()
> would ignore it, but the other algorithms would pass it through to the
> bitmap allocator.
How about to add an align_mask parameter to gen_pool_first_fit?
More information about the Linuxppc-dev