[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <86802c440807091147x71f980d0g829bb2c3ea105090@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 9 Jul 2008 11:47:38 -0700
From: "Yinghai Lu" <yhlu.kernel@...il.com>
To: "Suresh Siddha" <suresh.b.siddha@...el.com>
Cc: "Jeremy Fitzhardinge" <jeremy@...p.org>,
"mingo@...e.hu" <mingo@...e.hu>, "hpa@...or.com" <hpa@...or.com>,
"tglx@...utronix.de" <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [patch] tip/x86_64: fix e820 merge issue which broke max_pfn_mapped
On Wed, Jul 9, 2008 at 11:44 AM, Suresh Siddha
<suresh.b.siddha@...el.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 09, 2008 at 11:11:36AM -0700, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
>> Yinghai Lu wrote:
>> > try to reduce #ifdef CONFIG_X86_64/32, and make 32/64 at the same page.
>> >
>> > could be some regression from early_io_remap unifying from jeremy
>> >
>> > please check attached revert patch.
>>
>> Could my patch "x86_64: there's no need to preallocate
>> level1_fixmap_pgt" be a problem in itself? It seems sound to me, but
>
> Yep. Reverting it made my system with 2GB memory boot fine again.
only revert that one, or using the big revert patch i sent out.
>
>> none of my other code has any functional dependency on it; it's really
>> just cosmetic.
>
> have you test booted it before making this cosmetic change? :)
he should test system with 4g more RAM
YH
--
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