Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner+w=401wt.eu-S1760363AbXFGIyB@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1760363AbXFGIyB (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Thu, 7 Jun 2007 04:54:01 -0400
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752199AbXFGIxx
	(ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel-outgoing>);
	Thu, 7 Jun 2007 04:53:53 -0400
Received: from lucidpixels.com ([75.144.35.66]:41722 "EHLO lucidpixels.com"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1751951AbXFGIxw (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Thu, 7 Jun 2007 04:53:52 -0400
Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2007 04:53:52 -0400 (EDT)
From: Justin Piszcz <jpiszcz@lucidpixels.com>
X-X-Sender: jpiszcz@p34.internal.lan
To: Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>
cc: Jesse Barnes <jesse.barnes@intel.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
       "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] trim memory not covered by WB MTRRs
In-Reply-To: <20070607085147.GC15226@one.firstfloor.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0706070452330.32677@p34.internal.lan>
References: <200706061229.24486.jesse.barnes@intel.com>
 <200706061620.10627.jesse.barnes@intel.com> <Pine.LNX.4.64.0706061923470.2716@p34.internal.lan>
 <200706061627.46421.jesse.barnes@intel.com> <20070607085147.GC15226@one.firstfloor.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 2076
Lines: 51



On Thu, 7 Jun 2007, Andi Kleen wrote:

> On Wed, Jun 06, 2007 at 04:27:46PM -0700, Jesse Barnes wrote:
>> On Wednesday, June 6, 2007 4:24 pm Justin Piszcz wrote:
>>>> The mem= approach though looks slightly off, but I haven't looked
>>>> at x86_64's mem= handling to see why.  From a high level though,
>>>> adjusting end_pfn is the right thing to do, since theoretically
>>>> mem= could choose to make holes in your low memory and keep your
>>>> high memory in the allocation pools (though it's not generally
>>>> implemented this way).
>>>>
>>>> Jesse
>>>
>>> Ahh, ok!  Sounds great, I will keep running the kernel with your
>>> patch without mem= and let you know if I see any issues.
>>>
>>> Chances of getting this into 2.6.22-rc5?
>>
>> I'm not sure it's appropriate for -rc5 since it mucks around with some
>> early boot ordering, but I'll leave that to Andi, since it does address
>> some real bugs people have been seeing.
>
> I don't think the patch is suitable for merging at this time. Perhaps
> if it survives some time in -mm* / 2.6.23* it could be backported
> in a later 2.6.22 stable release. But right now it definitely
> needs more testing and addressing of my review comments.
>
>> Can we add your "Tested-by:  Justin Piszcz <jpiszcz@lucidpixels.com>" to
>> the patch? :)
>
> All such headers are only for the trail of blame and do you want to blame
> Justin if anything goes wrong? Perhaps it should rather have a
> Blame-to: <whoever wrote Justin/Jesse's BIOS> but that also wouldn't
> help without concrete contact points.
>
> -ANdi
>

Hah!  Again, I'll keep runnihg with Jesse's patch and as long as I can 
keep patching newer kernels I can continue to run with it.  So far, 
overnight with backups and the like, I have not noticed any problems. 
Also tested logging in to X/KDE, no issues. [yet]

Justin.
-
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/