From: Andrea Arcangeli <andrea@suse.de>
To: Dave Hansen <haveblue@us.ibm.com>
Cc: christoph <christoph@scalex86.org>, linux-mm <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
shai@scalex86.org,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Factor in buddy allocator alignment requirements in node memory alignment
Date: Tue, 17 May 2005 15:12:02 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20050517131202.GQ26073@g5.random> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1116276439.1005.110.camel@localhost>
On Mon, May 16, 2005 at 01:47:19PM -0700, Dave Hansen wrote:
> Just because it complains doesn't mean that anything is actually
> wrong :)
>
> Do you know which pieces of code actually break if the alignment doesn't
> meet what that warning says?
Be sure in early 2001 the alpha wildfire wasn't booting without having
natural alingment from the 2^order allocation, after several days of
debugging and crashing eventually I figured it out and added the printk
(it couldn't be a BUG since it was early in the boot to see it). The
kernel stack on x86 w/o 4k stacks depends on the natural alignment of
the 2^order buddy allocations for example. No idea how much other code
would break with not naturally aligned 2^order allocations.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Andrea Arcangeli <andrea@suse.de>
To: Dave Hansen <haveblue@us.ibm.com>
Cc: christoph <christoph@scalex86.org>, linux-mm <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
shai@scalex86.org,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Factor in buddy allocator alignment requirements in node memory alignment
Date: Tue, 17 May 2005 15:12:02 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20050517131202.GQ26073@g5.random> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1116276439.1005.110.camel@localhost>
On Mon, May 16, 2005 at 01:47:19PM -0700, Dave Hansen wrote:
> Just because it complains doesn't mean that anything is actually
> wrong :)
>
> Do you know which pieces of code actually break if the alignment doesn't
> meet what that warning says?
Be sure in early 2001 the alpha wildfire wasn't booting without having
natural alingment from the 2^order allocation, after several days of
debugging and crashing eventually I figured it out and added the printk
(it couldn't be a BUG since it was early in the boot to see it). The
kernel stack on x86 w/o 4k stacks depends on the natural alignment of
the 2^order buddy allocations for example. No idea how much other code
would break with not naturally aligned 2^order allocations.
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"aart@kvack.org"> aart@kvack.org </a>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-05-17 13:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-05-16 19:05 [PATCH] Factor in buddy allocator alignment requirements in node memory alignment christoph
2005-05-16 19:05 ` christoph
2005-05-16 20:14 ` Dave Hansen
2005-05-16 20:14 ` Dave Hansen
2005-05-16 19:43 ` christoph
2005-05-16 19:43 ` christoph
2005-05-16 20:47 ` Dave Hansen
2005-05-16 20:47 ` Dave Hansen
2005-05-16 19:55 ` christoph
2005-05-16 19:55 ` christoph
2005-05-16 20:56 ` Dave Hansen
2005-05-16 20:56 ` Dave Hansen
2005-05-16 20:12 ` christoph
2005-05-16 20:12 ` christoph
2005-05-16 21:06 ` Martin J. Bligh
2005-05-16 21:06 ` Martin J. Bligh
2005-05-17 13:12 ` Andrea Arcangeli [this message]
2005-05-17 13:12 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2005-05-17 14:16 ` Andy Whitcroft
2005-05-17 14:16 ` Andy Whitcroft
2005-05-16 20:51 ` Martin J. Bligh
2005-05-16 20:51 ` Martin J. Bligh
2005-05-17 12:25 ` Andy Whitcroft
2005-05-17 12:25 ` Andy Whitcroft
2005-05-17 17:19 ` christoph
2005-05-17 17:19 ` christoph
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20050517131202.GQ26073@g5.random \
--to=andrea@suse.de \
--cc=christoph@scalex86.org \
--cc=haveblue@us.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=shai@scalex86.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.