[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090926162046.GQ30185@one.firstfloor.org>
Date: Sat, 26 Sep 2009 10:20:05 -0700
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
CC: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
fengguang.wu@...el.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
Subject: Re: [origin tree build failure] Re: [PULL] Please pull hwpoison
code for 2.6.32
It doesn't help adjusting NODES_SHIFT - we're already operating in the stressed condition for which NODES_WIDTH == 0 (external node number.)
As such, NUMA vs !NUMA is a red herring - it's really about SPARSEMEM.
(Disclaimer: I have no access to the code at the moment and I only have my cell phone email, but I had to deal with this for another issue recently enough.)
-hpa
Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org> wrote:
>On Sat, Sep 26, 2009 at 09:17:34AM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>> Hardware is not the issue, but rather memory hotplug granularity for virtual environments.
>
>That's ZONES_SHIFT, but I proposed adjusting NODES_SHIFT.
>
>-Andi
>
>--
>ak@...ux.intel.com -- Speaking for myself only.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists