Re: sched: CPU #1's llc-sibling CPU #0 is not on the same node!

[Tang Chen]

On 03/01/2013 01:00 PM, Yinghai Lu wrote:
> On Thursday, February 28, 2013, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>
> > On 02/28/2013 08:32 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > > Yingai, Andrew,
> > >   is this ok with you two?
> > >
> > >          Linus
> >
> > FWIW, it makes sense to me iff it resolves the problems
>
>
> I prefer to reverting all 8 patches.
>
> Actually I have worked out one patch that could solve all problems, but it
> is too intrusive that I do      not want to split it to small pieces to
> post it.
>
> Leaving the movablemem_map related changes in  the upstream tree,
> will prevent me from continuing to make memblock to be used to allocate
> page table on local node ram for hot add.

Hi Yinghai,

Would you please give me a url to your code ?

I don't think movablemem_map will block your work a lot. According to your
description, you are modifying memblock to reserve some memory for local
node pagetables, right ?

If so, I think it won't be too difficult to make the code OK with your work.

Thanks. :)

> Will send reverting patch and putting page table on local node patch around
> 10pm after I get home.
>
> Thanks
--
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/