From: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@kernel.org>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Cc: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] x86, numa: Do not adjust start/end for early_node_mem()
Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2011 09:21:27 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4D629F17.5030006@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110221094318.GG31267@htj.dyndns.org>
On 02/21/2011 01:43 AM, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Sat, Feb 19, 2011 at 08:17:11PM -0800, Yinghai Lu wrote:
>>> The old code guarantees that the range is from a single zone, and even
>>> though memblock may be top -> down, it seems like there would be
>>> configurations where this would still be an issue (perhaps simulating it
>>> with numa=fake for testing?) if it crosses the boundary.
>>
>> memblock_x86_find_in_range_node() will go over with early_node_map[].
>> so it will always can get right on node allocation.
>
> I think always doing top-down allocation should be enough as long as
> there's no highmem, which we don't have on 64bit. That said, the
> patch description should note the behavior difference. Yinghai, care
> to add a bit more detail to the patch description?
please check
[PATCH] x86, numa, 64bit: Do not adjust start/end at first for early_node_mem()
We have top-down allocation with memblock way now.
So do not need to adjust start/end to make them above DMA region.
memblock allocation always get high address for us.
Just remove those lines.
Signed-off-by: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@kernel.org>
---
arch/x86/mm/numa_64.c | 9 ++-------
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
Index: linux-2.6/arch/x86/mm/numa_64.c
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6.orig/arch/x86/mm/numa_64.c
+++ linux-2.6/arch/x86/mm/numa_64.c
@@ -164,14 +164,9 @@ static void * __init early_node_mem(int
unsigned long mem;
/*
- * put it on high as possible
- * something will go with NODE_DATA
+ * memblock find will follow top-down. we will get addr above DMA region
+ * if possible, so don't need to adjust start anymore
*/
- if (start < (MAX_DMA_PFN<<PAGE_SHIFT))
- start = MAX_DMA_PFN<<PAGE_SHIFT;
- if (start < (MAX_DMA32_PFN<<PAGE_SHIFT) &&
- end > (MAX_DMA32_PFN<<PAGE_SHIFT))
- start = MAX_DMA32_PFN<<PAGE_SHIFT;
mem = memblock_x86_find_in_range_node(nodeid, start, end, size, align);
if (mem != MEMBLOCK_ERROR)
return __va(mem);
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-02-21 17:23 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <4D5EC05A.60103@kernel.org>
2011-02-18 18:59 ` [PATCH 1/4] x86, numa: Do not scan two times for setup_node_bootmem() Yinghai Lu
2011-02-20 4:03 ` David Rientjes
2011-02-21 10:20 ` [PATCH] x86-64, NUMA: " Tejun Heo
2011-02-18 18:59 ` [PATCH 2/4] x86, numa: Do not adjust start/end for early_node_mem() Yinghai Lu
2011-02-20 4:03 ` David Rientjes
2011-02-20 4:17 ` Yinghai Lu
2011-02-21 9:43 ` Tejun Heo
2011-02-21 10:44 ` Tejun Heo
2011-02-21 20:28 ` Yinghai Lu
2011-02-22 10:36 ` Tejun Heo
2011-02-22 10:39 ` Tejun Heo
2011-02-21 17:21 ` Yinghai Lu [this message]
2011-02-22 0:27 ` David Rientjes
2011-02-18 18:59 ` [PATCH 3/4] x86, numa: cleanup x86_acpi_numa_init() Yinghai Lu
2011-02-20 4:03 ` David Rientjes
2011-02-21 9:46 ` Tejun Heo
2011-02-18 18:59 ` [PATCH 4/4] x86, numa: seperate alloc_numa_distance from numa_reset_distance Yinghai Lu
2011-02-20 4:03 ` David Rientjes
2011-02-21 10:48 ` Tejun Heo
2011-02-21 17:36 ` Yinghai Lu
2011-02-22 10:23 ` [PATCH] x86-64, NUMA: Seperate out numa_alloc_distance() from numa_set_distance() Tejun Heo
2011-02-22 10:30 ` Ingo Molnar
2011-02-22 10:32 ` Tejun Heo
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=4D629F17.5030006@kernel.org \
--to=yinghai@kernel.org \
--cc=gorcunov@gmail.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=rientjes@google.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
/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).