[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <50F41639.2010305@redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2013 09:29:13 -0500
From: Prarit Bhargava <prarit@...hat.com>
To: Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>
CC: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>,
Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org>,
Tim Abbott <tabbott@...lice.com>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] module, fix percpu reserved memory exhaustion
On 01/11/2013 08:06 PM, Rusty Russell wrote:
> Prarit Bhargava <prarit@...hat.com> writes:
>> On 01/10/2013 10:48 PM, Rusty Russell wrote:
>> The timing were similar. I didn't see any huge delays, etc. Can the
>> relocations really cause a long delay? I thought we were pretty much writing
>> values to memory...
>
> For x86 that's true, but look at what ppc64 has to do for example. I'm
> guessing you don't have a giant Nvidia proprietary driver module
> loading, either.
Ah -- I see. I hadn't thought much about the other arches and I see what ppc64
does ...
>
>> [I should point out that I'm booting a 32 physical/64 logical, with 64GB of memory]
>
> I figured it had to be something big ;)
:) Imagine what happens at 4096 cpus (SGI territory). I'm wondering about that
kvm commit. Maybe the systemd/udev rule needs to be rewritten to avoid a 'kvm
loading flood' during boot ... I'll talk with Kay Sievers about it to see if
there's a way around that.
>
> OTOH, Tested-by: means it actually fixed someone's problem.
Got it. For the record over-the-weekend testing didn't show any bizarre
results. The boot times were all around 20-23 seconds.
Tested-by: Prarit Bhargava <prarit@...hat.com>
P.
--
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