[lkml]   [2005]   [May]   [17]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH] Factor in buddy allocator alignment requirements in node memory alignment
On Mon, May 16, 2005 at 01:47:19PM -0700, Dave Hansen wrote:
> Just because it complains doesn't mean that anything is actually
> wrong :)
> Do you know which pieces of code actually break if the alignment doesn't
> meet what that warning says?

Be sure in early 2001 the alpha wildfire wasn't booting without having
natural alingment from the 2^order allocation, after several days of
debugging and crashing eventually I figured it out and added the printk
(it couldn't be a BUG since it was early in the boot to see it). The
kernel stack on x86 w/o 4k stacks depends on the natural alignment of
the 2^order buddy allocations for example. No idea how much other code
would break with not naturally aligned 2^order allocations.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-05-17 15:17    [W:0.047 / U:6.492 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site