Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S965098AbWEOScR (ORCPT ); Mon, 15 May 2006 14:32:17 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S965123AbWEOScR (ORCPT ); Mon, 15 May 2006 14:32:17 -0400 Received: from smtp.osdl.org ([65.172.181.4]:24707 "EHLO smtp.osdl.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S965098AbWEOScQ (ORCPT ); Mon, 15 May 2006 14:32:16 -0400 Date: Mon, 15 May 2006 11:34:39 -0700 From: Andrew Morton To: Andi Kleen Cc: mingo@elte.hu, apw@shadowen.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86 NUMA panic compile error Message-Id: <20060515113439.457f5809.akpm@osdl.org> In-Reply-To: <200605152013.53728.ak@suse.de> References: <20060515005637.00b54560.akpm@osdl.org> <20060515175306.GA18185@elte.hu> <20060515110814.11c74d70.akpm@osdl.org> <200605152013.53728.ak@suse.de> X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 1.0.0 (GTK+ 1.2.10; i386-vine-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1672 Lines: 41 Andi Kleen wrote: > > > > > I'll be darned. I never knew it was even possible to run x86 numa kernels > > on non-numa boxen. I'd have tested about 1000000 of Christoph Lameter's > > patches if someone had told me. Yes, it's useful. > > If you want to use it for that I would suggest to port the numa emulation > code at least - two or four nodes tends to find more problems than a single > node. > > But testing on a 64bit box - even with numa emulation - would be much > better because on 32bit ZONE_NORMAL often is node 0 only and you won't > get much numaness for kernel objects. That's an excellent point - most developers who are likely to want to test NUMA have x86_64 boxes and x86_64 has NUMA-emulation-on-SMP. I'd semi-forgotten that it existed. This rather weakens the reasons for retaining support for NUMA-on-non-summit-x86. Ingo? > > I guess the concern here is that we don't want people building these > > frankenkernels and then sending us bug reports against them. > > Well it will still increase the bug numbers you care so much about. Not really. If a bug affects something we don't care about (like this) I'll just ignore it. I care about the number of busted machines out there, not the bug counts... > Another reason I don't like it is that it's ugly and reimplements > parts of ACPI on its own for no reason. So shouldn't such a patch remove that code rather than panicing? - 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/