[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <200805080009.46012.rjw@sisk.pl>
Date: Thu, 8 May 2008 00:09:45 +0200
From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
y-goto@...fujitsu.com
Subject: Re: sparc64 bootup regression...
On Wednesday, 30 of April 2008, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Tue, 29 Apr 2008 23:12:41 -0700 (PDT) David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> wrote:
>
> >
> > This commit causes bootup failures on sparc64:
> >
> > commit 86f6dae1377523689bd8468fed2f2dd180fc0560
> > Author: Yasunori Goto <y-goto@...fujitsu.com>
> > Date: Mon Apr 28 02:13:33 2008 -0700
> >
> > memory hotplug: allocate usemap on the section with pgdat
> >
> > Usemaps are allocated on the section which has pgdat by this.
> >
> > Because usemap size is very small, many other sections usemaps are allocated
> > on only one page. If a section has usemap, it can't be removed until removing
> > other sections. This dependency is not desirable for memory removing.
> >
> > Pgdat has similar feature. When a section has pgdat area, it must be the last
> > section for removing on the node. So, if section A has pgdat and section B
> > has usemap for section A, Both sections can't be removed due to dependency
> > each other.
> >
> > To solve this issue, this patch collects usemap on same section with pgdat.
> > If other sections doesn't have any dependency, this section will be able to be
> > removed finally.
>
> Thanks. Does a straightforward revert fix it? If so, we could do that while heads
> are being scratched.
Has that been reverted already?
--
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