[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87ej96hlc1.fsf@saeurebad.de>
Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2008 23:14:38 +0200
From: Johannes Weiner <hannes@...urebad.de>
To: "Yinghai Lu" <yhlu.kernel@...il.com>
Cc: "Ingo Molnar" <mingo@...e.hu>, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
mm-commits@...r.kernel.org, ak@...e.de, clameter@....com,
kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com, y-goto@...fujitsu.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: + bootmem-node-setup-agnostic-free_bootmem.patch added to -mm tree
Hi,
"Yinghai Lu" <yhlu.kernel@...il.com> writes:
>> > 2. intel cross node box: node0: 0g-2g, 4g-6g, node1: 2g-4g, 6g-8g. i
>> > don't think they have two bdata struct for every node.
>>
>> How do the bdata structures represent this setup right now? Are you
>> sure that there is not a node descriptor for every contiguous region?
>
> http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/3/25/233
>
> Subject [patch] srat, x86_64: Add support for nodes spanning other nodes
>
> For example, If the physical address layout on a two node system with 8 GB
> memory is something like:
> node 0: 0-2GB, 4-6GB
> node 1: 2-4GB, 6-8GB
>
> Current kernels fail to boot/detect this NUMA topology.
>
> ACPI SRAT tables can expose such a topology which needs to be supported.
>
> Signed-off-by: Suresh Siddha <suresh.b.siddha@...el.com>
As I understood the code (more guessing than understanding), it breaks
down these physical nodes into contiguous logical memory blocks which
then get represented by having a node descriptor for each of them. Can
you confirm that?
Hannes
--
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