From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756577Ab1D3Mfc (ORCPT ); Sat, 30 Apr 2011 08:35:32 -0400 Received: from mail-fx0-f46.google.com ([209.85.161.46]:63000 "EHLO mail-fx0-f46.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756312Ab1D3Mfa (ORCPT ); Sat, 30 Apr 2011 08:35:30 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=sender:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; b=MmPzp341Bz3OHkeK3BbjUe3Um8/UEVtMUde4bGOhDCLNdaFrFaluNYzzi6/RDGV5QL 09QYcAdPWVB/qwC4ZVzkp7h0BuODzHUM4YxuicHfwu39FwJkPO2kDpcjnc61QNnqmo1x HP3k0sUibBlT52Fe5nZonv9gk3B1mFDcpg/E0= Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2011 14:35:26 +0200 From: Tejun Heo To: Yinghai Lu Cc: mingo@redhat.com, rientjes@google.com, tglx@linutronix.de, hpa@zytor.com, x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86, NUMA: Fix empty memblk detection in numa_cleanup_meminfo() Message-ID: <20110430123526.GH29280@htj.dyndns.org> References: <1304090924-8197-1-git-send-email-tj@kernel.org> <4DBB1C16.3070307@kernel.org> <20110430121734.GF29280@htj.dyndns.org> <20110430123330.GG29280@htj.dyndns.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20110430123330.GG29280@htj.dyndns.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 02:33:30PM +0200, Tejun Heo wrote: > From: Yinghai Lu > > numa_cleanup_meminfo() trims each memblk between low (0) and high > (max_pfn) limits and discard empty ones. However, the emptiness > detection incorrectly used equality test. If the start of a memblk is > higher than max_pfn, it is empty but fails the equality test and > doesn't get discarded. > > Fix it by using >= instead of ==. > > Signed-off-by: Yinghai Lu > Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo > --- > So, something like this. Does this fix the problem you see? Ooh, this is before the code is moved to numa.c, so please test the previous patch against numa.c. Thanks. -- tejun