[lkml]   [2010]   [Dec]   [30]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH -v2 3/6] x86, 64bit, numa: Put pgtable to local node memory

* H. Peter Anvin <> wrote:

> On 12/29/2010 05:07 PM, David Rientjes wrote:
> > On Wed, 29 Dec 2010, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> >
> >>> That's from f51bf3073a1 (x86, numa: Fake apicid and pxm mappings for NUMA
> >>> emulation) and c1c3443c9c (x86, numa: Fake node-to-cpumask for NUMA
> >>> emulation) in x86/numa. Given the subject line, I think your patchset is
> >>> targeted to the same branch so I'm not sure what's concerning?
> >>
> >> No, it's part of a much bigger patchset which doesn't have anything to
> >> do with NUMA. That's the problem.
> >>
> >> In other words, I need a sane way to merge them and resolve the conflict.
> >
> > The two patches above from x86/numa that create the conflict should be
> > dependent only on 4e76f4e67a (x86, numa: Avoid compiling NUMA emulation
> > functions without CONFIG_NUMA_EMU), so cherry-pick them into x86/bootmem?
> That would hurt more, I think.

x86/bootmem could be based on x86/numa - the latter is stable so it's not like we'll
have to undo it from under x86/bootmem. We can then send it to Linus once x86/numa
is upstream.

Btw., i suspect we want to use x86/memblock instead of x86/bootmem?



 \ /
  Last update: 2010-12-30 10:09    [W:0.067 / U:3.520 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site