Re: [discuss] Re: x86_64: 2.6.14-rc4 swiotlb broken

From: David Lang
Date: Mon Oct 17 2005 - 18:51:51 EST


On Mon, 17 Oct 2005, Linus Torvalds wrote:

Why? Because the bootmem memory should still be allocated low-to-high by
default, which means that as logn as NODE(0) has _enough_ memory in the
DMA range, we should be ok.

So I _think_ the simple one-liner NODE(0) patch is sufficient, and should
work (and is a lot more acceptable for 2.6.14 than switching the node
ordering around yet again, or doing bigger surgery on the bootmem code).

So the only thing that worried me (and made me ask whether there might be
machines where it doesn't work) is if some machines might have their high
memory (or no memory at all) on NODE(0). It does sound unlikely, but I
simple don't know what kind of strange NUMA configs there are out there.

And I'm definitely only interested in machines that are out there, not
some theoretical issues.

what about x86_64 machines with 8G of ram connected to each CPU (4x2G DIMMs), not exactly common, but also not that rare.

also if CPU's are registered from high to low would a 2 CPU box with 8G of ram connected to one CPU and no ram connected to the second CPU match your problem case (I know that's a sub-optimal layout, but it's legal)

David Lang


Linus
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/


--
There are two ways of constructing a software design. One way is to make it so simple that there are obviously no deficiencies. And the other way is to make it so complicated that there are no obvious deficiencies.
-- C.A.R. Hoare
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/