From: Kamezawa Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
To: "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@intel.com>,
"Izumi, Taku" <izumi.taku@jp.fujitsu.com>
Cc: "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-mm@kvack.org" <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
"qiuxishi@huawei.com" <qiuxishi@huawei.com>,
"mel@csn.ul.ie" <mel@csn.ul.ie>,
"akpm@linux-foundation.org" <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
"Hansen, Dave" <dave.hansen@intel.com>,
"matt@codeblueprint.co.uk" <matt@codeblueprint.co.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: Introduce kernelcore=reliable option
Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2015 15:56:52 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5639AC34.9030603@jp.fujitsu.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3908561D78D1C84285E8C5FCA982C28F32B64312@ORSMSX114.amr.corp.intel.com>
On 2015/10/31 4:42, Luck, Tony wrote:
>> If each memory controller has the same distance/latency, you (your firmware) don't need
>> to allocate reliable memory per each memory controller.
>> If distance is problem, another node should be allocated.
>>
>> ...is the behavior(splitting zone) really required ?
>
> It's useful from a memory bandwidth perspective to have allocations
> spread across both memory controllers. Keeping a whole bunch of
> Xeon cores fed needs all the bandwidth you can get.
>
Hmm. But physical address layout is not related to dual memory controller.
I think reliable range can be contiguous by firmware...
-Kame
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-11-04 6:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-10-15 13:32 [PATCH] mm: Introduce kernelcore=reliable option Taku Izumi
2015-10-19 2:25 ` Xishi Qiu
2015-10-20 0:34 ` Izumi, Taku
2015-10-20 1:42 ` Xishi Qiu
2015-10-21 18:17 ` Luck, Tony
2015-10-22 10:02 ` Kamezawa Hiroyuki
2015-10-22 23:26 ` Luck, Tony
2015-10-23 1:01 ` Izumi, Taku
2015-10-23 1:44 ` Luck, Tony
2015-10-30 6:19 ` Kamezawa Hiroyuki
2015-10-30 19:42 ` Luck, Tony
2015-11-04 6:56 ` Kamezawa Hiroyuki [this message]
2015-10-23 3:36 ` Xishi Qiu
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=5639AC34.9030603@jp.fujitsu.com \
--to=kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=dave.hansen@intel.com \
--cc=izumi.taku@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=matt@codeblueprint.co.uk \
--cc=mel@csn.ul.ie \
--cc=qiuxishi@huawei.com \
--cc=tony.luck@intel.com \
/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).