From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757316AbYCYR3k (ORCPT ); Tue, 25 Mar 2008 13:29:40 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754634AbYCYR3d (ORCPT ); Tue, 25 Mar 2008 13:29:33 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([66.187.233.31]:51635 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754412AbYCYR3c (ORCPT ); Tue, 25 Mar 2008 13:29:32 -0400 Message-ID: <47E93655.10907@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2008 13:28:53 -0400 From: Chris Snook User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.12 (X11/20080226) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Suresh Siddha CC: mingo@elte.hu, hpa@zytor.com, tglx@linutronix.de, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org Subject: Re: [patch] srat, x86_64: Add support for nodes spanning other nodes References: <20080325171435.GA3313@linux-os.sc.intel.com> In-Reply-To: <20080325171435.GA3313@linux-os.sc.intel.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Suresh Siddha wrote: > For example, If the physical address layout on a two node system with 8 GB > memory is something like: > node 0: 0-2GB, 4-6GB > node 1: 2-4GB, 6-8GB > > Current kernels fail to boot/detect this NUMA topology. > > ACPI SRAT tables can expose such a topology which needs to be supported. > > Signed-off-by: Suresh Siddha > --- > > diff --git a/arch/x86/Kconfig b/arch/x86/Kconfig > index 227fdb0..99eb102 100644 > --- a/arch/x86/Kconfig > +++ b/arch/x86/Kconfig > @@ -880,6 +880,15 @@ config X86_64_ACPI_NUMA > help > Enable ACPI SRAT based node topology detection. > > +# Some NUMA nodes have memory ranges that span > +# other nodes. Even though a pfn is valid and > +# between a node's start and end pfns, it may not > +# reside on that node. See memmap_init_zone() > +# for details. > +config NODES_SPAN_OTHER_NODES > + def_bool y > + depends on X86_64_ACPI_NUMA > + Is this hunk a leftover from your testing? You're not using the config option anywhere, and there isn't really anything in this patch that would justify making this a separate config option in mainline. -- Chris