[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:0.018 / U:57.704 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site