From: Kamezawa Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
Cc: Wen Congyang <wency@cn.fujitsu.com>,
rob@landley.net, tglx@linutronix.de,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
x86@kernel.org,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
bhelgaas@google.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2 v2] x86: add max_addr boot option
Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2012 11:21:43 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4FD7F937.2010101@jp.fujitsu.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <d468fc51-04f6-4e88-aeaa-c4642531325e@email.android.com>
(2012/06/13 1:10), H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> If what you care about is nodes, why not have an option to specify a map?
>
At the first time of our project, we discussed passing node-id as boot option.
But, we found Node-ID is just determined by the pxm ID order in SRAT. That means,
we and our firmware team need to take care of the order of SRAT. But that node-ID
v.s. SRAT relationship is just determined by implemenation, there is no spec,
we thought we can't keep this way in future.
The second thought was specifying PXM. But, with hardware-partitioning-system,
dynamic implementation of SRAT for a partutuion is very confusing...
Then, alternative idea was using mem= boot option. Because our partition system
has fixed address range per each node, it works well.
But now, we know mem= boot option is buggy....it acts as max_addr= option, we
have concerns that 'someone may fix mem= option as sane as ia64. because it's buggy".
We'd like to fix mem= boot option by ourselves and preserve old behavior with max_addr=
boot option, which ia64 has.
Thanks,
-Kame
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-06-13 2:23 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-06-11 8:44 [PATCH 1/2 v2] x86: add max_addr boot option Wen Congyang
2012-06-11 8:46 ` [PATCH 2/2 v2] x86: reimplement mem " Wen Congyang
2012-06-11 17:35 ` [PATCH 1/2 v2] x86: add max_addr " Bjorn Helgaas
2012-06-12 6:29 ` Wen Congyang
2012-06-12 11:30 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2012-06-13 1:55 ` Kamezawa Hiroyuki
2012-06-13 4:59 ` Rob Landley
2012-06-14 2:06 ` Kamezawa Hiroyuki
2012-06-14 20:00 ` Rob Landley
2012-06-11 21:15 ` H. Peter Anvin
2012-06-12 6:26 ` Wen Congyang
2012-06-12 16:10 ` H. Peter Anvin
2012-06-13 2:21 ` Kamezawa Hiroyuki [this message]
2012-06-13 3:29 ` H. Peter Anvin
2012-06-13 5:20 ` Kamezawa Hiroyuki
2012-06-13 5:36 ` Wen Congyang
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=4FD7F937.2010101@jp.fujitsu.com \
--to=kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=rob@landley.net \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=wency@cn.fujitsu.com \
--cc=x86@kernel.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.