Re: linux-next ia64 build problems in slqb

[Pekka Enberg <penberg@cs.helsinki.fi>]

Hi Tony,

On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 9:45 PM, Luck, Tony <tony.luck@intel.com> wrote:
>> Interesting. What exactly is an UP NUMA machine?
>
> UP + NUMA is a special case of memory-only nodes.  There are
> some (crazy?) customers with problems that require very large
> amounts of memory, but not very much cpu horse power.  They
> buy large multi-node systems and populate all the nodes with
> as much memory as they can afford, but most nodes get zero
> cpus.

Oh, cool. Thanks for the explanation!

On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 9:45 PM, Luck, Tony <tony.luck@intel.com> wrote:
>> Anyway, I'm more than
>> happy to apply a tested patch to fix up SLQB. Nick?
>
> I'm trying to check whether http://lkml.org/lkml/2009/4/20/30
> fixes things.  It certainly solves the complilation problem,
> but I'm running into apparently unrelated issues trying to
> boot linux-next kernels.

Great! You can try it on top of the "topic/slqb/core" branch of

  git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/penberg/slab-2.6.git

if you want. It's basically plain 2.6.30-rc1 plus SLQB.

One minor nit: the patch should define an empty static inline of
claim_remote_free_list() for the !SMP case. I can fix it at my end
before merging, though, if necessary.

                                       Pekka