From: Prarit Bhargava <prarit@redhat.com>
To: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>,
Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>,
Tim Abbott <tabbott@ksplice.com>, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] module, fix percpu reserved memory exhaustion
Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2013 09:29:13 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <50F41639.2010305@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87pq1byzum.fsf@rustcorp.com.au>
On 01/11/2013 08:06 PM, Rusty Russell wrote:
> Prarit Bhargava <prarit@redhat.com> writes:
>> On 01/10/2013 10:48 PM, Rusty Russell wrote:
>> The timing were similar. I didn't see any huge delays, etc. Can the
>> relocations really cause a long delay? I thought we were pretty much writing
>> values to memory...
>
> For x86 that's true, but look at what ppc64 has to do for example. I'm
> guessing you don't have a giant Nvidia proprietary driver module
> loading, either.
Ah -- I see. I hadn't thought much about the other arches and I see what ppc64
does ...
>
>> [I should point out that I'm booting a 32 physical/64 logical, with 64GB of memory]
>
> I figured it had to be something big ;)
:) Imagine what happens at 4096 cpus (SGI territory). I'm wondering about that
kvm commit. Maybe the systemd/udev rule needs to be rewritten to avoid a 'kvm
loading flood' during boot ... I'll talk with Kay Sievers about it to see if
there's a way around that.
>
> OTOH, Tested-by: means it actually fixed someone's problem.
Got it. For the record over-the-weekend testing didn't show any bizarre
results. The boot times were all around 20-23 seconds.
Tested-by: Prarit Bhargava <prarit@redhat.com>
P.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-01-14 14:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-01-10 2:41 [PATCH] module, fix percpu reserved memory exhaustion Prarit Bhargava
2013-01-11 3:48 ` Rusty Russell
2013-01-11 14:16 ` Prarit Bhargava
2013-01-12 1:06 ` Rusty Russell
2013-01-14 14:29 ` Prarit Bhargava [this message]
2013-01-14 17:18 ` 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=50F41639.2010305@redhat.com \
--to=prarit@redhat.com \
--cc=efault@gmx.de \
--cc=josh@joshtriplett.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rusty@rustcorp.com.au \
--cc=tabbott@ksplice.com \
--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).