Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754801AbbKDG5P (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 Nov 2015 01:57:15 -0500 Received: from mgwym04.jp.fujitsu.com ([211.128.242.43]:46155 "EHLO mgwym04.jp.fujitsu.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754332AbbKDG5N (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 Nov 2015 01:57:13 -0500 X-SecurityPolicyCheck: OK by SHieldMailChecker v2.3.2 X-SHieldMailCheckerPolicyVersion: FJ-ISEC-20150223 X-SHieldMailCheckerMailID: beeb85879bae4b7a9cdf548290981d28 Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: Introduce kernelcore=reliable option To: "Luck, Tony" , "Izumi, Taku" References: <1444915942-15281-1-git-send-email-izumi.taku@jp.fujitsu.com> <3908561D78D1C84285E8C5FCA982C28F32B5A060@ORSMSX114.amr.corp.intel.com> <5628B427.3050403@jp.fujitsu.com> <3908561D78D1C84285E8C5FCA982C28F32B5C7AE@ORSMSX114.amr.corp.intel.com> <322B7BFA-08FE-4A8F-B54C-86901BDB7CBD@intel.com> <56330C0A.3060901@jp.fujitsu.com> <3908561D78D1C84285E8C5FCA982C28F32B64312@ORSMSX114.amr.corp.intel.com> Cc: "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-mm@kvack.org" , "qiuxishi@huawei.com" , "mel@csn.ul.ie" , "akpm@linux-foundation.org" , "Hansen, Dave" , "matt@codeblueprint.co.uk" From: Kamezawa Hiroyuki Message-ID: <5639AC34.9030603@jp.fujitsu.com> Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2015 15:56:52 +0900 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <3908561D78D1C84285E8C5FCA982C28F32B64312@ORSMSX114.amr.corp.intel.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-TM-AS-MML: disable Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 888 Lines: 23 On 2015/10/31 4:42, Luck, Tony wrote: >> If each memory controller has the same distance/latency, you (your firmware) don't need >> to allocate reliable memory per each memory controller. >> If distance is problem, another node should be allocated. >> >> ...is the behavior(splitting zone) really required ? > > It's useful from a memory bandwidth perspective to have allocations > spread across both memory controllers. Keeping a whole bunch of > Xeon cores fed needs all the bandwidth you can get. > Hmm. But physical address layout is not related to dual memory controller. I think reliable range can be contiguous by firmware... -Kame -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/