linuxppc-dev.lists.ozlabs.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Michael Ellerman <michael@ellerman.id.au>
To: David Huffman <dhuffman@storix.com>
Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, Nathan Lynch <ntl@pobox.com>
Subject: Re: Kernel Panic booting cdrom
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2007 12:10:22 +1000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1177294222.3889.9.camel@concordia.ozlabs.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <46292B07.3030907@storix.com>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1877 bytes --]

On Fri, 2007-04-20 at 14:05 -0700, David Huffman wrote:
> Nathan,
> 
> I think I determined why I received a kernel panic and the numa=off 
> argument fixed the problem. When we boot from cdrom we specify maxcpus=1 
> as a kernel argument. A system with numa enabled fails.  I plan on 
> adding numa=off whenever I use maxcpus=1, but I wonder if you could 
> answer a question for me.
> 
> I originally was told that in the case where I am booting a basic system 
> into an initrd instead of in normal mode, I should use maxcpus=1 because 
> there may be power and cooling daemons that are not running and try to 
> limit the system resources by limiting the number of cpus. Does this 
> sound right? I can successfully boot a cdrom without the maxcpus flag on 
> an SMP system but maybe it is typically not a good idea?
> 
> I can prevent the kernel panics by removing maxcpus=1 and not adding 
> numa=off. I am a little more informed about numa (now), but I am fuzzy 
> as to all the implications with allowing more cpus for cdrom install 
> media. The maxcpus=1 argument was something we added to our install boot 
> media years ago and few here remember why it was such a great idea. The 
> power/resource management was the only thing we could come up with.

maxcpus=x is poorly tested, I would definitely NOT recommend it.

I don't think there's any issue with power etc. With maxcpus=1 all the
other CPUs are still running, they're just not used by the kernel - in
fact a cursory glance suggests they will do less power saving in that
situation than when they're in use but idle.

cheers

-- 
Michael Ellerman
OzLabs, IBM Australia Development Lab

wwweb: http://michael.ellerman.id.au
phone: +61 2 6212 1183 (tie line 70 21183)

We do not inherit the earth from our ancestors,
we borrow it from our children. - S.M.A.R.T Person

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

  reply	other threads:[~2007-04-23  2:10 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2007-04-14  0:37 Kernel Panic booting cdrom David Huffman
2007-04-14  4:45 ` Nathan Lynch
     [not found]   ` <4623F574.1030804@storix.com>
     [not found]     ` <20070417054537.GF6062@localdomain>
2007-04-20 21:05       ` David Huffman
2007-04-23  2:10         ` Michael Ellerman [this message]
2007-04-23 22:35         ` Linas Vepstas

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=1177294222.3889.9.camel@concordia.ozlabs.ibm.com \
    --to=michael@ellerman.id.au \
    --cc=dhuffman@storix.com \
    --cc=linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org \
    --cc=ntl@pobox.com \
    /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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).