[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090818153815.GA11913@elte.hu>
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2009 17:38:15 +0200
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@...ell.com>
Cc: linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] replace various uses of num_physpages by totalram_pages
* Jan Beulich <JBeulich@...ell.com> wrote:
> Sizing of memory allocations shouldn't depend on the number of
> physical pages found in a system, as that generally includes
> (perhaps a huge amount of) non-RAM pages. The amount of what
> actually is usable as storage should instead be used as a basis
> here.
>
> Some of the calculations (i.e. those not intending to use high
> memory) should likely even use (totalram_pages -
> totalhigh_pages).
>
> Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@...ell.com>
> Acked-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>
>
> ---
> arch/x86/kernel/microcode_core.c | 4 ++--
Acked-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Just curious: how did you find this bug? Did you find this by
experiencing problems on a system with a lot of declared non-RAM
memory?
Ingo
--
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