[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <3908561D78D1C84285E8C5FCA982C28F32A8E39B@ORSMSX114.amr.corp.intel.com>
Date: Mon, 8 Jun 2015 15:14:27 +0000
From: "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@...el.com>
To: Leon Romanovsky <leon@...n.nu>, Xishi Qiu <qiuxishi@...wei.com>
CC: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
"nao.horiguchi@...il.com" <nao.horiguchi@...il.com>,
Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"mingo@...e.hu" <mingo@...e.hu>, Xiexiuqi <xiexiuqi@...wei.com>,
Hanjun Guo <guohanjun@...wei.com>,
Linux MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [RFC PATCH 01/12] mm: add a new config to manage the code
> > +config MEMORY_MIRROR
> > + bool "Address range mirroring support"
> > + depends on X86 && NUMA
> > + default y
> Is it correct for the systems (NOT xeon) without memory support built in?
Is the "&& NUMA" doing that? If you support NUMA, then you are not a minimal
config for a tablet or laptop.
If you want a symbol that has a stronger correlation to high end Xeon features
then perhaps MEMORY_FAILURE?
-Tony
Powered by blists - more mailing lists