Messages in this thread | | | From | Andi Kleen <> | Subject | Re: 2.6.23 boot failures on x86-64. | Date | Mon, 29 Oct 2007 20:56:00 +0100 |
| |
On Monday 29 October 2007 20:43:11 Dave Jones wrote: > On Mon, Oct 29, 2007 at 08:03:09PM +0100, Andi Kleen wrote: > > > > > It's probably the usual "nobody tests sparsemem at all" issue. > > > > > > We've been using SPARSEMEM in Fedora for a *long* time. > > > So long in fact, I forget why we moved away from DISCONTIGMEM, so there's > > > a significant number of users using that configuration for some time. > > > > Supposedly you wanted a slower kernel that needs more memory? > > > > Ok I wasn't aware of that. I tended to get sparsemem reports usually > > at least 1-2 releases after the fact, so it looked like it was undertested. > > Looking at cvs history, I can't figure out what the reasoning was, > but every Fedora (and RHEL5) kernel since 2006/07/05 has been that way. > > Curious how no-one noticed either of the side-effects you mention.
It's a few percent on a few benchmarks iirc. vmemmap (now in .24) was supposed to address that.
-Andi - 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/
| |