Messages in this thread | | | From | Johannes Weiner <> | Subject | Re: + bootmem-node-setup-agnostic-free_bootmem.patch added to -mm tree | Date | Tue, 15 Apr 2008 23:38:03 +0200 |
| |
Hi,
"Yinghai Lu" <yhlu.kernel@gmail.com> writes:
> On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 2:14 PM, Johannes Weiner <hannes@saeurebad.de> wrote: >> Hi, >> >> "Yinghai Lu" <yhlu.kernel@gmail.com> writes: >> >> >> >> > 2. intel cross node box: node0: 0g-2g, 4g-6g, node1: 2g-4g, 6g-8g. i >> >> > don't think they have two bdata struct for every node. >> >> >> >> How do the bdata structures represent this setup right now? Are you >> >> sure that there is not a node descriptor for every contiguous region? >> > >> > http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/3/25/233 >> > >> > Subject [patch] srat, x86_64: Add support for nodes spanning other nodes >> > >> > For example, If the physical address layout on a two node system with 8 GB >> > memory is something like: >> > node 0: 0-2GB, 4-6GB >> > node 1: 2-4GB, 6-8GB >> > >> > Current kernels fail to boot/detect this NUMA topology. >> > >> > ACPI SRAT tables can expose such a topology which needs to be supported. >> > >> > Signed-off-by: Suresh Siddha <suresh.b.siddha@intel.com> >> >> As I understood the code (more guessing than understanding), it breaks >> down these physical nodes into contiguous logical memory blocks which >> then get represented by having a node descriptor for each of them. Can >> you confirm that? > > Not sure, on x86_64 one node should have one bdata only. > execpt suresh update that to make one node have two bdata.
We are just guessing around here.
My understanding is that right now we have contigous physical nodes represented by a node descriptor each and with Suresh's patch we have each contigous block represented by its own node descriptor.
So in this setup
node 0: 0-2GB, 4-6GB node 1: 2-4GB, 6-8GB
we have 4 node descriptors [0-2], [2-4], [4-6], [6-8]?
Can someone please ack/nak this?
Hannes
| |