Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751500AbVKBFHf (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 Nov 2005 00:07:35 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751501AbVKBFHe (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 Nov 2005 00:07:34 -0500 Received: from dvhart.com ([64.146.134.43]:28842 "EHLO localhost.localdomain") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751500AbVKBFHe (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 Nov 2005 00:07:34 -0500 Date: Tue, 01 Nov 2005 21:07:39 -0800 From: "Martin J. Bligh" Reply-To: "Martin J. Bligh" To: Andi Kleen , Bob Picco , Andy Whitcroft Cc: Dave Hansen , Janne M O Heikkinen , Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: x86_64: 2.6.14 with NUMA panics at boot Message-ID: <222900000.1130908059@[10.10.2.4]> In-Reply-To: <200510310312.18395.ak@suse.de> References: <1130607017.12551.5.camel@localhost> <20051031001727.GC6019@localhost.localdomain> <200510310312.18395.ak@suse.de> X-Mailer: Mulberry/2.2.1 (Linux/x86) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1629 Lines: 41 --Andi Kleen wrote (on Monday, October 31, 2005 03:12:17 +0100): > On Monday 31 October 2005 01:17, Bob Picco wrote: > >> This is a slightly modified patch I used on x86_64 for EXTREME testing. The >> original 2.6.13-rc1-mhp1 patch didn't apply cleanly against 2.6.14. It will >> apply with this untested patch. The patch needs to have arch_sparse_init >> which is only active for SPARSEMEM. This patch was just for testing EXTREME >> on x86_64 NUMA and needs review. >> >> I think the bootmem allocator is being used before initialized. This >> wouldn't have happened before SPARSEMEM_EXTREME became the default. >> >> If you feel my analysis is correct, I'll generate a cleaner patch and >> test on my 4 way. > > Ok the question is - why did nobody submit this patch in time? When > sparse was merged I assumed folks would actually test and maintain > it. But that doesn't seem to be the case? Somewhat surprising. > > I personally don't care much about sparsemem right now because it doesn't have > any advantage and if it's unmaintained would consider to mark it > CONFIG_BROKEN. That's simply because we can't have highly experimental > CONFIGs in a production kernel that unsuspecting users can just set and break > their configuration. > > Dave, is there someone in charge for sparsemem on x86-64? Sparsemem is Andy's baby. He is duly cc'ed. M. - 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/