On Tue, 11 Mar 2025 at 06:56, Mike Rapoport wrote:
>
> On Fri, Mar 07, 2025 at 04:28:15PM +0100, Heiko Carstens wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 06, 2025 at 08:51:17PM +0200, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> > > From: "Mike Rapoport (Microsoft)"
> > >
> > > Allocating the zero pages from memblock is simpler because
On Wed, Mar 12, 2025 at 04:56:59PM +0100, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Mar 2025 at 06:56, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Mar 07, 2025 at 04:28:15PM +0100, Heiko Carstens wrote:
> > > On Thu, Mar 06, 2025 at 08:51:17PM +0200, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> > > > From: "Mike Rapoport (Microsoft)
On Fri, Mar 07, 2025 at 04:28:15PM +0100, Heiko Carstens wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 06, 2025 at 08:51:17PM +0200, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> > From: "Mike Rapoport (Microsoft)"
> >
> > Allocating the zero pages from memblock is simpler because the memory is
> > already reserved.
> >
> > This will also hel
On Thu, Mar 06, 2025 at 08:51:17PM +0200, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> From: "Mike Rapoport (Microsoft)"
>
> Allocating the zero pages from memblock is simpler because the memory is
> already reserved.
>
> This will also help with pulling out memblock_free_all() to the generic
> code and reducing code
From: "Mike Rapoport (Microsoft)"
Allocating the zero pages from memblock is simpler because the memory is
already reserved.
This will also help with pulling out memblock_free_all() to the generic
code and reducing code duplication in arch::mem_init().
Signed-off-by: Mike Rapoport (Microsoft)