From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S964883AbWDMLQt (ORCPT ); Thu, 13 Apr 2006 07:16:49 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S964884AbWDMLQt (ORCPT ); Thu, 13 Apr 2006 07:16:49 -0400 Received: from moutng.kundenserver.de ([212.227.126.188]:13285 "EHLO moutng.kundenserver.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S964883AbWDMLQs (ORCPT ); Thu, 13 Apr 2006 07:16:48 -0400 Message-ID: <1624893.1144927001987.SLOX.WebMail.wwwrun@exchange.deltacomputer.de> Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2006 13:16:41 +0200 (CEST) From: Oliver Weihe To: Andi Kleen Subject: Re: Re: Opteron 128GB NODMAPSIZE too small? Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <200604121946.59895.ak@suse.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (normal) X-Mailer: SuSE Linux Openexchange Server 4 - WebMail (Build 2.4160) X-Operating-System: Linux 2.4.21-295-smp i386 (JVM 1.3.1_13) Organization: Delta Computer Products GmbH References: <7986404.1144863211340.SLOX.WebMail.wwwrun@exchange.deltacomputer.de> <200604121946.59895.ak@suse.de> X-Provags-ID: kundenserver.de abuse@kundenserver.de login:62e2eaa30f0557f14c09a5fa777a0a78 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Dear Andi, thx for your quick reply. > > While running SuSE Linux 10.0 (x86_64) with a vanilla 2.6.16.1 on an > > 8way (8 sockets) Opteron equipped with 128GB (16GB per socket) of > > memory > > I found this in dmesg. > > > > Any guesses to which value I should set NODEMAPSIZE? > > Currently it is 0xfff (from 'include/asm-x86_64/mmzone.h') > > 0x2fff. Or update to a newer kernel - it should > have that problem fixed by finding a better hash shift that works > with a smaller table too. A newer Kernel (vanilla 2.6.16.5) doens't solve the problem (hash-shift is still 25bit and with the default 12bit (0xfff) in NODEMAPSIZE there is still one bit missing to adress the whole memory). Anyway, increasing NODEMAPSIZE solves the problem. I wanted to ask you before doing this because I'm not familar with the code and can't imagin if this has any sideeffects. Regards, Oliver Weihe