[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Fri, 6 Jun 2008 13:21:07 +0200
From: "Vegard Nossum" <vegard.nossum@...il.com>
To: "Andrew Morton" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: "Ingo Molnar" <mingo@...e.hu>,
"Stephen Rothwell" <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
linux-next@...r.kernel.org, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"Mike Travis" <travis@....com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: Tree for June 5
On Fri, Jun 6, 2008 at 12:54 PM, Andrew Morton
<akpm@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
> On Fri, 6 Jun 2008 02:48:11 -0700 Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
...
> commit a9ad585c8a18f7ba754b85f5786976609b9d7d29
> Author: Mike Travis <travis@....com>
> Date: Mon May 12 21:21:12 2008 +0200
>
> x86: remove the static 256k node_to_cpumask_map
>
> * Consolidate node_to_cpumask operations and remove the 256k
> byte node_to_cpumask_map. This is done by allocating the
> node_to_cpumask_map array after the number of possible nodes
> (nr_node_ids) is known.
>
> * Debug printouts when CONFIG_DEBUG_PER_CPU_MAPS is active have
> been increased. It now shows faults when calling node_to_cpumask()
> and node_to_cpumask_ptr().
This might be obvious, but maybe enabling CONFIG_DEBUG_PER_CPU_MAPS
will give you some more (valuable) info? It looks to me like maybe
nr_node_ids is returning inconsistent numbers or used somewhere before
it's properly initialized.
Vegard
--
"The animistic metaphor of the bug that maliciously sneaked in while
the programmer was not looking is intellectually dishonest as it
disguises that the error is the programmer's own creation."
-- E. W. Dijkstra, EWD1036
--
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