[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <3908561D78D1C84285E8C5FCA982C28F1E06EB22@ORSMSX108.amr.corp.intel.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2013 16:28:29 +0000
From: "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@...el.com>
To: Yasuaki Ishimatsu <isimatu.yasuaki@...fujitsu.com>,
Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>
CC: Don Morris <don.morris@...com>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Thomas Renninger <trenn@...e.de>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Tim Gardner <tim.gardner@...onical.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"tglx@...utronix.de" <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"mingo@...hat.com" <mingo@...hat.com>,
"x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
"a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl" <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
"Sakkinen, Jarkko" <jarkko.sakkinen@...el.com>,
"tangchen@...fujitsu.com" <tangchen@...fujitsu.com>
Subject: RE: sched: CPU #1's llc-sibling CPU #0 is not on the same node!
> assume first cpu only have 1G ram, and other 31 socket will have bunch of ram
That doesn't seem to be a very realistic assumption. Can you even still buy 1G
DIMMs for servers? I'd think that a minimum would be to have each of four
channels populated with a 4G DIMM - so 16GB on first cpu. But even that feels
rather low.
I think that making sure that the system can boot is good (and maybe it should
ignore/override[*] parameters that would prevent booting). But let's be realistic
about the cases we actually have to deal with (before somebody comes and talks
about systems with just 16MB).
-Tony
[*] with some noisy warnings in the console log
--
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