[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2007 19:24:24 -0400 (EDT)
From: Justin Piszcz <jpiszcz@...idpixels.com>
To: Jesse Barnes <jesse.barnes@...el.com>
cc: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] trim memory not covered by WB MTRRs
On Wed, 6 Jun 2007, Jesse Barnes wrote:
> On Wednesday, June 6, 2007 3:57 pm Justin Piszcz wrote:
>> On Wed, 6 Jun 2007, Jesse Barnes wrote:
>>> On Wednesday, June 6, 2007 3:26 pm Justin Piszcz wrote:
>>>> Nope, I booted with only netconsole= options. I have a lot of HW
>>>> in the box and I guess the buffer is too small. Not sure where to
>>>> change it in the kernel. Looking..
>>>
>>> It's called "kernel log buffer size" and it's in "General setup".
>>>
>>> Jesse
>>
>> Did the dmesg output get you what you needed? Why the few KB
>> difference?
>>
>> :)
>
> Yeah, looked at your e820 and your MTRR settings and I think my patch is
> doing the right thing (i.e. trimming just the right amount of memory,
> leaving you with as much as possible).
>
> The mem= approach though looks slightly off, but I haven't looked at
> x86_64's mem= handling to see why. From a high level though, adjusting
> end_pfn is the right thing to do, since theoretically mem= could choose
> to make holes in your low memory and keep your high memory in the
> allocation pools (though it's not generally implemented this way).
>
> Jesse
>
Ahh, ok! Sounds great, I will keep running the kernel with your patch
without mem= and let you know if I see any issues.
Chances of getting this into 2.6.22-rc5?
Justin.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists