[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <52E285DA.1090107@intel.com>
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2014 07:25:14 -0800
From: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>
To: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
CC: Grygorii Strashko <grygorii.strashko@...com>,
Linux-MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Santosh Shilimkar <santosh.shilimkar@...com>,
Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: Panic on 8-node system in memblock_virt_alloc_try_nid()
On 01/24/2014 07:01 AM, Dave Hansen wrote:
> There are two failure modes I'm seeing: one when (failing to) allocate
> the first node's mem_map[], and a second where it oopses accessing the
> numa_distance[] table. This is the numa_distance[] one, and it happens
> even with the patch you suggested applied.
And with my second (lots of debugging enabled) config, I get the
mem_map[] oops. In other words, none of the reverts or patches are
helping either of the conditions that I'm able to trigger.
--
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