From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1760637AbYD3Gip (ORCPT ); Wed, 30 Apr 2008 02:38:45 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754147AbYD3Gig (ORCPT ); Wed, 30 Apr 2008 02:38:36 -0400 Received: from smtp1.linux-foundation.org ([140.211.169.13]:56033 "EHLO smtp1.linux-foundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752530AbYD3Gig (ORCPT ); Wed, 30 Apr 2008 02:38:36 -0400 Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2008 23:38:32 -0700 From: Andrew Morton To: David Miller Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, y-goto@jp.fujitsu.com Subject: Re: sparc64 bootup regression... Message-Id: <20080429233832.168fb6ee.akpm@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: <20080429.231241.221824292.davem@davemloft.net> References: <20080429.231241.221824292.davem@davemloft.net> X-Mailer: Sylpheed 2.4.8 (GTK+ 2.12.5; x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 29 Apr 2008 23:12:41 -0700 (PDT) David Miller wrote: > > This commit causes bootup failures on sparc64: > > commit 86f6dae1377523689bd8468fed2f2dd180fc0560 > Author: Yasunori Goto > Date: Mon Apr 28 02:13:33 2008 -0700 > > memory hotplug: allocate usemap on the section with pgdat > > Usemaps are allocated on the section which has pgdat by this. > > Because usemap size is very small, many other sections usemaps are allocated > on only one page. If a section has usemap, it can't be removed until removing > other sections. This dependency is not desirable for memory removing. > > Pgdat has similar feature. When a section has pgdat area, it must be the last > section for removing on the node. So, if section A has pgdat and section B > has usemap for section A, Both sections can't be removed due to dependency > each other. > > To solve this issue, this patch collects usemap on same section with pgdat. > If other sections doesn't have any dependency, this section will be able to be > removed finally. Thanks. Does a straightforward revert fix it? If so, we could do that while heads are being scratched.