Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 04 Aug 2006 20:31:56 +0900 | From | Yasunori Goto <> | Subject | Re: [Lhms-devel] [PATCH] memory hotadd fixes [1/5] not-aligned memory hotadd handling fix |
| |
> > > After Keith's report of memory hotadd failure, I increased test patterns. > > > These patches are a result of new patterns. But I cannot cover all existing > > > memory layout in the world, more tests are needed. > > > Now, I think my patch can make things better and want this codes to be tested > > > in -mm.patche series is consitsts of 5 patches. > > > > I expect the code which these patches touch is completely untested in -mm, so > > all we'll get is compile testing and some review. > > > > Given that these patches touch pretty much nothing but the memory hot-add > > paths I'd be inclined to fast-track them into 2.6.18. Do you agree that > > these patches are sufficiently safe and that the problems that they solve > > are sufficiently serious for us to take that approach? > > > > Either way, could I ask that interested parties review this work closely > > and promptly? > > Hmm. I reviewed them a bit, and I couldn't find any problems. > > However, my ia64 box is same of his. And emulation environment is very > close too. So, my perspective must be very similar from him. > I think my review is not enough. Keith-san's test is better if he can. > > Anyway, I'll test them with -mm. Something different environment > may be good for test.
I tested them (includes 6/5) with -mm. There is no regression on my emulation.
Acked-by: Yasunori Goto <y-goto@jp.fujitsu.com>
-- Yasunori Goto
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |