From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from psmtp.com (na3sys010amx195.postini.com [74.125.245.195]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with SMTP id C729D6B0005 for ; Mon, 25 Feb 2013 04:02:02 -0500 (EST) Received: by mail-da0-f45.google.com with SMTP id v40so1385560dad.4 for ; Mon, 25 Feb 2013 01:02:01 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <512B287E.3020902@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2013 17:01:50 +0800 From: Will Huck MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [Bug fix PATCH 1/2] acpi, movablemem_map: Exclude memblock.reserved ranges when parsing SRAT. References: <1361358056-1793-1-git-send-email-tangchen@cn.fujitsu.com> <1361358056-1793-2-git-send-email-tangchen@cn.fujitsu.com> <5124C22B.8030401@cn.fujitsu.com> <5124C32E.1080902@gmail.com> <3908561D78D1C84285E8C5FCA982C28F1E06B55D@ORSMSX108.amr.corp.intel.com> <512564B1.8020008@gmail.com> <3908561D78D1C84285E8C5FCA982C28F1E06B636@ORSMSX108.amr.corp.intel.com> In-Reply-To: <3908561D78D1C84285E8C5FCA982C28F1E06B636@ORSMSX108.amr.corp.intel.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: "Luck, Tony" Cc: Tang Chen , "akpm@linux-foundation.org" , "jiang.liu@huawei.com" , "wujianguo@huawei.com" , "hpa@zytor.com" , "wency@cn.fujitsu.com" , "laijs@cn.fujitsu.com" , "linfeng@cn.fujitsu.com" , "yinghai@kernel.org" , "isimatu.yasuaki@jp.fujitsu.com" , "rob@landley.net" , "kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com" , "minchan.kim@gmail.com" , "mgorman@suse.de" , "rientjes@google.com" , "guz.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com" , "rusty@rustcorp.com.au" , "lliubbo@gmail.com" , "jaegeuk.hanse@gmail.com" , "glommer@parallels.com" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-mm@kvack.org" On 02/21/2013 08:23 AM, Luck, Tony wrote: >> Thanks for your clarify. What's the relationship between memory ranges >> and address ranges here? > The ranges in the SRAT table might cover more memory than is present on > the system. E.g. on some large Itanium systems the SRAT table would say > that 0-1TB was on node0, 1-2TB on node1, etc. > > The EFI memory map described the memory actually present (perhaps just > a handful of GB on each node). > > X86 systems tend not to have such radically sparse layouts, so this may be less > of a distinction. > >> What's the relationship between memory/address ranges and /proc/iomem? > I *think* that /proc/iomem just shows what is in e820 (for the memory entries, > it also adds in I/O ranges that come from other ACPI sources). When I setup a new e820 range through memmap, system hung during boot. Is there limit when setup memmap? > > -Tony -- 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: email@kvack.org