[lkml]   [2006]   [May]   [15]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH] x86 NUMA panic compile error
On Monday 15 May 2006 19:53, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Andy Whitcroft <> wrote:
> > if (use_cyclone == 0) {
> > /* Make sure user sees something */
> > - static const char s[] __initdata = "Not an IBM x440/NUMAQ. Don't use i386 CONFIG_NUMA anywhere else."
> > + static const char s[] __initdata = "Not an IBM x440/NUMAQ. Don't use i386 CONFIG_NUMA anywhere else.";
> > early_printk(s);
> > panic(s);
> > }
> i still strongly oppose the original Andi hack... numerous reasons were
> given not to apply it (it's nice to simulate/trigger rarer features on
> mainstream hardware too, and this ability to boot NUMA on my flat x86
> testbox found at least one other NUMA bug already). Furthermore, the
> crash i reported was fixed by the NUMA patchset. Andrew, please drop:

The problem is that it's not regularly used on a wide range
of boxes so it will eventually break again. We had this cycle several
times already.

It's also missing a lot of the workarounds for broken SRATs that
are needed for many of the existing NUMA systems.

If there's consensus i386 NUMA is useful I can drop it, but I predict
it will just eventually break again.

> x86_64-mm-i386-numa-summit-check.patch
> (which has nothing to do with x86_64 anyway)

I have a lot of i386 or combined i386/x86-64 patches in my tree - just Andrew's
merge script doesn't pick that up.

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: 2006-05-15 20:04    [W:0.133 / U:0.616 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site