[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1105031655370.19613@chino.kir.corp.google.com>
Date: Tue, 3 May 2011 16:57:15 -0700 (PDT)
From: David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
To: Ben Hutchings <ben@...adent.org.uk>
cc: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...e.de>,
Michael Schmitz <schmitzmic@...glemail.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, stable@...nel.org,
Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org>, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, stable-review@...nel.org,
alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk, Greg KH <gregkh@...e.de>
Subject: Re: [Stable-review] [36/55] [PARISC] slub: fix panic with
DISCONTIGMEM
On Wed, 4 May 2011, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > SLUB relies heavily on N_NORMAL_MEMORY, so these two patches fix that
> > allocator but the problem is actually not just isolated to that subsystem;
> > it fixes an issue with anything that uses N_NORMAL_MEMORY.
> >
> > The former patch sets the nodes correctly for parisc and Michael's patch
> > sets the nodes correctly for m68k, so it's the same fix for two different
> > previously-broken architectures.
>
> So if I understand you correctly, the Kconfig condition for SLUB is
> now wrong - only architectures that use DISCONTIGMEM's fake-NUMA and
> don't set the node states to N_NORMAL_MEMORY will break it. And
> there's no good way to test for that in Kconfig.
>
Right, I haven't seen a kernel panic from a kernel that still breaks after
those two patches (the one for parisc and the one for m68k) were merged in
the slub allocator. James, if you have such a panic on parisc, please
post it.
Thanks!
--
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