Re: 2.6.23 boot failures on x86-64.

[Andi Kleen]

On Monday 29 October 2007 20:43:11 Dave Jones wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 29, 2007 at 08:03:09PM +0100, Andi Kleen wrote:
> 
>  > >  > It's probably the usual "nobody tests sparsemem at all" issue.
>  > > 
>  > > We've been using SPARSEMEM in Fedora for a *long* time.
>  > > So long in fact, I forget why we moved away from DISCONTIGMEM, so there's
>  > > a significant number of users using that configuration for some time.
>  > 
>  > Supposedly you wanted a slower kernel that needs more memory? 
>  > 
>  > Ok I wasn't aware of that. I tended to get sparsemem reports usually
>  > at least 1-2 releases after the fact, so it looked like it was undertested.
> 
> Looking at cvs history, I can't figure out what the reasoning was,
> but every Fedora (and RHEL5) kernel since 2006/07/05 has been that way.
> 
> Curious how no-one noticed either of the side-effects you mention.

It's a few percent on a few benchmarks iirc. vmemmap (now in .24) was supposed
to address that.

-Andi
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/