From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753356Ab1AGNcz (ORCPT ); Fri, 7 Jan 2011 08:32:55 -0500 Received: from vpn.id2.novell.com ([195.33.99.129]:47303 "EHLO vpn.id2.novell.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753209Ab1AGNcy convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Fri, 7 Jan 2011 08:32:54 -0500 Message-Id: <4D272413020000780002B009@vpn.id2.novell.com> X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise Internet Agent 8.0.1 Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2011 13:32:51 +0000 From: "Jan Beulich" To: "Ingo Molnar" Cc: "David Rientjes" , "Tejun Heo" , , , "H. Peter Anvin" Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: unify "numa=" command line option handling References: <4D2603BF020000780002ACA7@vpn.id2.novell.com> <4D26D3FD020000780002AED9@vpn.id2.novell.com> <4D26F3AE020000780002AF5D@vpn.id2.novell.com> <20110107125722.GA23185@elte.hu> In-Reply-To: <20110107125722.GA23185@elte.hu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Content-Disposition: inline Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org >>> On 07.01.11 at 13:57, Ingo Molnar wrote: > * Jan Beulich wrote: > >> >>> On 07.01.11 at 10:58, David Rientjes wrote: >> > On Fri, 7 Jan 2011, Jan Beulich wrote: >> > >> >> However, the problem my patch addresses has been long standing >> >> (I noted it with our .32 based kernel, but according to my looking at >> >> the code it would go back to at least .27), so I'd like to ask for it to >> >> be merged independently (and I should probably have copied stable >> >> too), unless (quite unlikely) Tejun's merge is intended to also be >> >> applied to stable kernels. >> >> >> > >> > I don't think this should be targeted to -stable since it's not a bugfix; >> > this is adding a feature that allows you to disable acpi parsing of the >> > SRAT on i386. >> >> How is this not a bug fix if it allows a system to boot that previously >> didn't? > > btw., that's an absolutely key piece of information that REALLY should have > been > included in the changelog of the first patch. It is more important than all > of the > changelog. Quoting that text: "In order to be able to suppress the use of SRAT tables that 32-bit Linux can't deal with (possibly leading to a non- bootable system, without disabling ACPI altogether), move the "numa=" option handling to common code." To me it says just that. And of course, not every system with a not understood SRAT would be yielded non-bootable, hence the wording "possibly leading to ...". Jan