Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1030405AbVKPQk1 (ORCPT ); Wed, 16 Nov 2005 11:40:27 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1030407AbVKPQk1 (ORCPT ); Wed, 16 Nov 2005 11:40:27 -0500 Received: from fgwmail5.fujitsu.co.jp ([192.51.44.35]:26254 "EHLO fgwmail5.fujitsu.co.jp") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1030406AbVKPQk0 (ORCPT ); Wed, 16 Nov 2005 11:40:26 -0500 Message-ID: <437B60DC.1000404@jp.fujitsu.com> Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 01:39:56 +0900 From: Kamezawa Hiroyuki User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.6 (Windows/20050716) X-Accept-Language: ja, en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Dave Hansen CC: Andrew Morton , Linux Kernel Mailing List , lhms Subject: Re: [Lhms-devel] Re: 2.6.14-mm2 References: <20051110203544.027e992c.akpm@osdl.org> <437B2C82.6020803@jp.fujitsu.com> <1132147036.7915.19.camel@localhost> <437B5801.4010204@jp.fujitsu.com> <1132158704.19290.3.camel@localhost> In-Reply-To: <1132158704.19290.3.camel@localhost> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-2022-JP Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1480 Lines: 38 Dave Hansen wrote: > On Thu, 2005-11-17 at 01:02 +0900, Kamezawa Hiroyuki wrote: > >>>Can you explain in a little bit more detail why this matters, and >>>exactly how it fixes your problem. I'm not sure it's correct. >>> >> >>Ah, okay. >> >>It's just because free_area[] is not initaialized at all if this is not called. >>It is list.next and list.prev has bad value. >>Then, the first free_page(page) will cause panic. > > > Hmmm. I _think_ you're just trying to do some things at runtime that I > didn't intend. In the patch I pointed to in the last mail, look at what > I did in hot_add_zone_init(). It does some of what > free_area_init_core() does, but only the most minimal bits. Basically: > > zone_wait_table_init(zone, size_pages); > init_currently_empty_zone(zone, phys_start_pfn, size_pages); > zone_pcp_init(zone); > > Your way may also be valid, but I broke out init_currently_empty_zone() > for a reason, and I think this was it. I don't think we want to be > calling free_area_init_core() itself at runtime. > Okay... I'll read what you done more carefully and find another approach. I guess what I need is that free_area[] is initialized before the first free_page[]. thanks, -- 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/