Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261353AbVALTYz (ORCPT ); Wed, 12 Jan 2005 14:24:55 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261352AbVALTW1 (ORCPT ); Wed, 12 Jan 2005 14:22:27 -0500 Received: from fw.osdl.org ([65.172.181.6]:37331 "EHLO mail.osdl.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261305AbVALTUQ (ORCPT ); Wed, 12 Jan 2005 14:20:16 -0500 Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 11:20:15 -0800 From: Chris Wright To: Matthew Dobson Cc: Chris Wright , William Lee Irwin III , LKML Subject: Re: node_online_map patch kills x86_64 Message-ID: <20050112112015.P24171@build.pdx.osdl.net> References: <20050111151656.A24171@build.pdx.osdl.net> <20050112000726.GD14443@holomorphy.com> <20050111163504.D24171@build.pdx.osdl.net> <1105555323.8266.2.camel@arrakis> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <1105555323.8266.2.camel@arrakis>; from colpatch@us.ibm.com on Wed, Jan 12, 2005 at 10:42:03AM -0800 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2038 Lines: 59 * Matthew Dobson (colpatch@us.ibm.com) wrote: > On Tue, 2005-01-11 at 16:35, Chris Wright wrote: > > Thanks wli. Seems Andi understands the issue despite my unintelligible > > bug report ;-) > > > > thanks, > > -chris > > So I assume you were trying to saying that backing out the patches makes > the machine boot, and leaving them in kills it, right? Yes, exactly. Not sure which part of my brain was misfiring when I wrote that gibberish ;-) > And does Andi's > "[PATCH] x86_64: Optimize nodemask operations slightly" fix your > problem? I'm assuming that's what the reference to "Andi understanding > the issue" meant? Or is there still a problem booting x86_64 with the > numnodes -> node_online_map patches? The patch from Andi that I tested which fixed the issue for me was: Index: linux/arch/x86_64/mm/srat.c =================================================================== --- linux.orig/arch/x86_64/mm/srat.c 2005-01-09 18:19:17.%N +0100 +++ linux/arch/x86_64/mm/srat.c 2005-01-12 02:43:54.%N +0100 @@ -29,8 +29,8 @@ if (pxm2node[pxm] == 0xff) { if (num_online_nodes() >= MAX_NUMNODES) return -1; - pxm2node[pxm] = num_online_nodes(); - node_set_online(num_online_nodes()); + pxm2node[pxm] = num_online_nodes() - 1; + node_set_online(pxm2node[pxm]); } return pxm2node[pxm]; } This looks like just a straight fix for the following from your patch (AFAICT): - pxm2node[pxm] = numnodes - 1; - numnodes++; + pxm2node[pxm] = num_online_nodes(); + node_set_online(num_online_nodes()); However, what's in bk is a bit different and it too is working well: http://linux.bkbits.net:8080/linux-2.6/gnupatch@41e543d4Ujgg-Hk9pyWGiXvs7oXkBw Hope that clarifies. Thanks. -chris -- Linux Security Modules http://lsm.immunix.org http://lsm.bkbits.net - 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/