[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4D1BD928.50701@zytor.com>
Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2010 16:58:16 -0800
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To: David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
CC: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH -v2 3/6] x86, 64bit, numa: Put pgtable to local node memory
On 12/29/2010 04:39 PM, David Rientjes wrote:
> On Wed, 29 Dec 2010, Yinghai Lu wrote:
>
>>>> -v2: update it to recent numa-emulation change
>>>>
>>>
>>> Lovely, yet another interbranch conflict. This makes me very concerned.
>>>
>>> What is the delta between these?
>>>
>>
>> your new x86/numa have
>>
>> setup_physnodes(addr, max_addr, acpi, amd);
>> fake_physnodes(acpi, amd, num_nodes);
>>
>> instead of
>>
>> acpi_fake_nodes(nodes, num_nodes);
>>
>> in numa_emulation()
>>
>
> That's from f51bf3073a1 (x86, numa: Fake apicid and pxm mappings for NUMA
> emulation) and c1c3443c9c (x86, numa: Fake node-to-cpumask for NUMA
> emulation) in x86/numa. Given the subject line, I think your patchset is
> targeted to the same branch so I'm not sure what's concerning?
No, it's part of a much bigger patchset which doesn't have anything to
do with NUMA. That's the problem.
In other words, I need a sane way to merge them and resolve the conflict.
-hpa
--
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