[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.00.0907271758170.29815@chino.kir.corp.google.com>
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 2009 18:02:50 -0700 (PDT)
From: David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
To: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>
cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Lee Schermerhorn <lee.schermerhorn@...com>,
KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>,
miaox@...fujitsu.com, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org>,
Paul Menage <menage@...gle.com>,
Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@...oo.com.au>, y-goto@...fujitsu.com,
Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [BUG] set_mempolicy(MPOL_INTERLEAV) cause kernel panic
On Tue, 28 Jul 2009, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote:
> > The problem originally reported here doesn't appear to have anything to do
> > with hotplug, it looks like it is the result of Lee's observation that
> > ia64 defaults top_cpuset's mems to N_POSSIBLE, which _should_ have been
> > updated by cpuset_init_smp().
> cpuset_init_smp() just updates cpuset's mask.
> init's task->mems_allowed is intizialized independently from cpuset's mask.
>
Presumably the bug is that N_HIGH_MEMORY is not a subset of N_ONLINE at
this point on ia64.
> Could you teach me a pointer for Lee's observation ?
>
http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=124767909310293
--
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