[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20091215200918.GX28252@kernel.dk>
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 21:09:18 +0100
From: Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com>
To: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>
Cc: Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@...tuousgeek.org>,
Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, mingo@...e.hu,
rdreier@...co.com, Suresh Siddha <suresh.b.siddha@...el.com>,
"linux-pci@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: kexec boot regression
On Tue, Dec 15 2009, Yinghai Lu wrote:
> Jens Axboe wrote:
> > On Tue, Dec 15 2009, Yinghai Lu wrote:
> >> Jens Axboe wrote:
> >>> On Tue, Dec 15 2009, Yinghai Lu wrote:
> >>>> [PATCH] x86/pci: intel ioh bus num reg accessing fix
> >>>>
> >>>> it is above 0x100, so if mmconf is not enable, need to skip it
> >>> This works, it kexecs kernels fine. But since 2.6.32 doesn't have the
> >>> mmconf problem to begin with, are we now just working around the issue?
> >>> SRAT still reports issues, numa doesn't work.
> >> that patch will be bullet proof... we need it.
> >>
> >> also still need to figure out why memmap range is not passed properly.
> >>
> >> do you mean 2.6.32 kexec 2.6.32 it have worked mmconf and numa in
> >> second kernel?
> >
> > Yes, 2.6.32 booted and 2.6.32 kexec'ed works just fine, no SRAT
> > complaints and NUMA works fine.
> >
> how about
>
> current kernel booted and 2.6.32 kexec'ed works just fine, no SRAT
> complaints and NUMA works fine. ?
Yes, that's exactly what happens, see the previous reply I sent. mmconf
still complains, though.
--
Jens Axboe
--
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