[lkml]   [2006]   [May]   [15]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [PATCH] x86 NUMA panic compile error
    Andi Kleen <> wrote:
    > >
    > > I'll be darned. I never knew it was even possible to run x86 numa kernels
    > > on non-numa boxen. I'd have tested about 1000000 of Christoph Lameter's
    > > patches if someone had told me. Yes, it's useful.
    > If you want to use it for that I would suggest to port the numa emulation
    > code at least - two or four nodes tends to find more problems than a single
    > node.
    > But testing on a 64bit box - even with numa emulation - would be much
    > better because on 32bit ZONE_NORMAL often is node 0 only and you won't
    > get much numaness for kernel objects.

    That's an excellent point - most developers who are likely to want to test
    NUMA have x86_64 boxes and x86_64 has NUMA-emulation-on-SMP. I'd
    semi-forgotten that it existed.

    This rather weakens the reasons for retaining support for
    NUMA-on-non-summit-x86. Ingo?

    > > I guess the concern here is that we don't want people building these
    > > frankenkernels and then sending us bug reports against them.
    > Well it will still increase the bug numbers you care so much about.

    Not really. If a bug affects something we don't care about (like this)
    I'll just ignore it. I care about the number of busted machines out there,
    not the bug counts...

    > Another reason I don't like it is that it's ugly and reimplements
    > parts of ACPI on its own for no reason.

    So shouldn't such a patch remove that code rather than panicing?

    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 20:34    [W:0.023 / U:17.744 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site