On Thu, Aug 21, 2025 at 10:06:27PM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:

In an ideal world, we wouldn't have to deal with SPARSEMEM without
SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP, but in particular for 32bit SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP is
considered too costly and consequently not supported.

However, if an architecture does support SPARSEMEM with
SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP, let's forbid the user to disable VMEMMAP: just
like we already do for arm64, s390 and x86.

So if SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP is supported, don't allow to use SPARSEMEM without
SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP.

This implies that the option to not use SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP will now be
gone for loongarch, powerpc, riscv and sparc. All architectures only
enable SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP with 64bit support, so there should not really
be a big downside to using the VMEMMAP (quite the contrary).

This is a preparation for not supporting

(1) folio sizes that exceed a single memory section
(2) CMA allocations of non-contiguous page ranges

in SPARSEMEM without SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP configs, whereby we
want to limit possible impact as much as possible (e.g., gigantic hugetlb
page allocations suddenly fails).

Cc: Huacai Chen <chenhuacai@kernel.org>
Cc: WANG Xuerui <kernel@xen0n.name>
Cc: Madhavan Srinivasan <maddy@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>
Cc: Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com>
Cc: Christophe Leroy <redacted>
Cc: Paul Walmsley <redacted>
Cc: Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@dabbelt.com>
Cc: Albert Ou <aou@eecs.berkeley.edu>
Cc: Alexandre Ghiti <alex@ghiti.fr>
Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>
Cc: Andreas Larsson <andreas@gaisler.com>
Signed-off-by: David Hildenbrand <redacted>

Acked-by: Mike Rapoport (Microsoft) <rppt@kernel.org>

-- 
Sincerely yours,
Mike.