From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1030253AbWGaQyv (ORCPT ); Mon, 31 Jul 2006 12:54:51 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1030255AbWGaQyv (ORCPT ); Mon, 31 Jul 2006 12:54:51 -0400 Received: from omx1-ext.sgi.com ([192.48.179.11]:31694 "EHLO omx1.americas.sgi.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1030253AbWGaQyu (ORCPT ); Mon, 31 Jul 2006 12:54:50 -0400 Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2006 09:54:29 -0700 From: Paul Jackson To: "Siddha, Suresh B" Cc: mingo@elte.hu, nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au, vatsa@in.ibm.com, suresh.b.siddha@intel.com, Simon.Derr@bull.net, steiner@sgi.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, akpm@osdl.org Subject: Re: [BUG] sched: big numa dynamic sched domain memory corruption Message-Id: <20060731095429.d2b8801d.pj@sgi.com> In-Reply-To: <20060731090440.A2311@unix-os.sc.intel.com> References: <20060731070734.19126.40501.sendpatchset@v0> <20060731071242.GA31377@elte.hu> <20060731090440.A2311@unix-os.sc.intel.com> Organization: SGI X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 2.2.4 (GTK+ 2.8.3; i686-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > Paul can you please test the mainline code and confirm? Sure - which version of Linus and/or Andrew's tree is the minimum worth testing? Could you explain why you don't think the mainline has this problem? I still see the critical code piece there: #ifdef CONFIG_NUMA if (cpus_weight(*cpu_map) > SD_NODES_PER_DOMAIN*cpus_weight(nodemask)) { What other critical bugs are fixed between the SLES10 variant and the mainline? -- I won't rest till it's the best ... Programmer, Linux Scalability Paul Jackson 1.925.600.0401