| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Message-Id: <1236163190.5330.7091.camel@laptop> Date: Wed, 04 Mar 2009 11:39:50 +0100 From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu> Cc: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org> Subject: Re: 32bit panic on 4 sockets On Wed, 2009-03-04 at 11:34 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote: > * Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote: > > > On Tue, 2009-03-03 at 22:57 -0800, Yinghai Lu wrote: > > > On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 6:05 PM, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org> wrote: > > > > Looks like a genuine bootmem bug. Cc'ing Johannes and > > > > quoting whole body. > > > > > > it is x86 32bit numa code problem. it assume bootmem will > > > sit on first node only. > > > > Seems a bit daft to run a 32bit kernel on such a machine.. at > > some point we should just give up and not push this 32 bit > > madness any further. > > it works just fine on a lot of systems - and since we keep > unifying a lot of these codepaths we are better off keeping it > all working. Sure, but eg. running with 16GB on a 32bit system just isn't going to work well. Same with large cpu-count, at some point you might be able to boot, but not much else. -- 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