From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751683AbWFXBPb (ORCPT ); Fri, 23 Jun 2006 21:15:31 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S933176AbWFXBPb (ORCPT ); Fri, 23 Jun 2006 21:15:31 -0400 Received: from cantor.suse.de ([195.135.220.2]:34966 "EHLO mx1.suse.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751683AbWFXBPa (ORCPT ); Fri, 23 Jun 2006 21:15:30 -0400 From: Andi Kleen To: "Keith Mannthey" Subject: Re: [PATCH] [20/82] i386: Panic the system when a NUMA kernel doesn't run on IBM NUMA Date: Sat, 24 Jun 2006 03:15:56 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.1 Cc: "Dave Jones" , torvalds@osdl.org, discuss@x86-64.org, akpm@osdl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <449C8510.mailCWD11E44E@suse.de> <200606240242.31906.ak@suse.de> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200606240315.56365.ak@suse.de> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > > I agree that i386 CONFIG_NUMA is only ment to boot on small subset of > hw but there is litte motivation to boot a numa kernel on a non-numa > box. I am supprised that no one has enabled i386 AMD NUMA (the one > numa box that regular people have access to). I never bothered because 32bit NUMA with lowmem only on node 0 isn't very useful. Using it with 64bit makes much more sense. > > I'm sure someone will bring up now an example where their non Summit > > machine booted with CONFIG_NUMA, but they were just extremly lucky > > and unlikely to be for very long. > > Current Summit HW (x460) dosen't use/have a cyclone. There are > patches submitted to this list to support it's i386 NUMA boot. Hmm, that's a good point. When the detection doesn't work reliable it's no good. Ok, Linus please don't apply that patch for now then. -Andi