Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1760421AbXJ2TD0 (ORCPT ); Mon, 29 Oct 2007 15:03:26 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754822AbXJ2TDS (ORCPT ); Mon, 29 Oct 2007 15:03:18 -0400 Received: from mx2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:58829 "EHLO mx2.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752496AbXJ2TDR (ORCPT ); Mon, 29 Oct 2007 15:03:17 -0400 From: Andi Kleen Organization: SUSE Linux Products GmbH, Nuernberg, GF: Markus Rex, HRB 16746 (AG Nuernberg) To: Dave Jones Subject: Re: 2.6.23 boot failures on x86-64. Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2007 20:03:09 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.6 Cc: Linux Kernel , Martin Ebourne , Zou Nan hai , Suresh Siddha , stable@kernel.org, Andrew Morton , Linus Torvalds References: <20071029175014.GH7793@redhat.com> <200710291918.43869.ak@suse.de> <20071029184747.GB1650@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <20071029184747.GB1650@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200710292003.09317.ak@suse.de> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1506 Lines: 36 On Monday 29 October 2007 19:47:47 Dave Jones wrote: > On Mon, Oct 29, 2007 at 07:18:43PM +0100, Andi Kleen wrote: > > On Monday 29 October 2007 18:50:14 Dave Jones wrote: > > > We've had a number of people reporting that their x86-64s stopped booting > > > when they moved to 2.6.23. It rebooted just after discovering the AGP bridge > > > as a result of the IOMMU init. > > > > It's probably the usual "nobody tests sparsemem at all" issue. > > We've been using SPARSEMEM in Fedora for a *long* time. > So long in fact, I forget why we moved away from DISCONTIGMEM, so there's > a significant number of users using that configuration for some time. Supposedly you wanted a slower kernel that needs more memory? Ok I wasn't aware of that. I tended to get sparsemem reports usually at least 1-2 releases after the fact, so it looked like it was undertested. > > > But if allocating bootmem >4G doesn't work on these systems > > most likely they have more problems anyways. It might be better > > to find out what goes wrong exactly. > > Any ideas on what to instrument ? See what address the bootmem_alloc_high returns; check if it overlaps with something etc. Fill the memory on the system and see if it can access all of its memory. -Andi - 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/