All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* num_physpages vs. totalram_pages
@ 2009-06-05 13:24 Jan Beulich
  2009-06-07  0:08 ` Rusty Russell
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 2+ messages in thread
From: Jan Beulich @ 2009-06-05 13:24 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Rusty Russell; +Cc: linux-kernel

Rusty,

in a mail from beginning of last year you indicated that the confusion between
these two variables should be cleaned up. Since I wasn't able to spot any
follow-up regarding this matter, I'm wondering what the plan here is. I'm
asking because we have got customers reporting inconsistencies mainly caused
by the use of num_physpages where totalram_pages would really be more
appropriate (other than in your mail, where you mainly point at the networking
code, this is with the determination of the number of files the system will use
without admin involvement), due to large sparse areas in the physical address
map.

Unfortunately, the meaning of num_physpages seems to also vary between
architectures (some treat it as being the same as totalram_pages) as well as
subsystems (memory hotplug increments/decrements num_physpages along
with totalram_pages).

Thanks, Jan


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2009-06-07  0:08 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 2+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2009-06-05 13:24 num_physpages vs. totalram_pages Jan Beulich
2009-06-07  0:08 ` Rusty Russell

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.