From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1760177AbYDOT5W (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 Apr 2008 15:57:22 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1760844AbYDOT5H (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 Apr 2008 15:57:07 -0400 Received: from wr-out-0506.google.com ([64.233.184.230]:62915 "EHLO wr-out-0506.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1759526AbYDOT5F (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 Apr 2008 15:57:05 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=S8Dl5oq/cVT7EJCM/RfVOUzf93HkjD/kF1vpDgJnRCYxAHMYAIQvsGkzvOHi7JquyiYmakMpWTClGVt4dbld7ZKAbtD0kzAkGK1pSaunPOWvzGtrFkL5O2MpM8m0HU2FwS6FOX71i9HfHp+KFLRRshgQ55sldRFCwdtlOauwpxQ= Message-ID: <86802c440804151257m735bdac6xb7d0b1b155274e2d@mail.gmail.com> Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2008 12:57:04 -0700 From: "Yinghai Lu" To: "Johannes Weiner" Subject: Re: [patch 2/2] bootmem: Node-setup agnostic free_bootmem() Cc: "Andi Kleen" , "Andrew Morton" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, "Ingo Molnar" , "Yasunori Goto" , "KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki" , "Christoph Lameter" In-Reply-To: <87r6d6hp6y.fsf@saeurebad.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <20080412223319.372887160@symbol.fehenstaub.lan> <20080412225850.704752615@symbol.fehenstaub.lan> <87lk3hwv52.fsf@basil.nowhere.org> <20080414232308.ffa4e269.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <48045D6C.1010508@firstfloor.org> <87skxnibb1.fsf@saeurebad.de> <86802c440804151144l7497dae3nb3b07374fd71a282@mail.gmail.com> <87r6d6hp6y.fsf@saeurebad.de> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 12:51 PM, Johannes Weiner wrote: > Hi, > > > "Yinghai Lu" writes: > > > On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 4:53 AM, Johannes Weiner wrote: > >> > >> Andi Kleen writes: > >> > >> > Andrew Morton wrote: > >> >> On Sun, 13 Apr 2008 18:56:57 +0200 Andi Kleen wrote: > >> >> > >> >>> Johannes Weiner writes: > >> >>> > >> >>>> Make free_bootmem() look up the node holding the specified address > >> >>>> range which lets it work transparently on single-node and multi-node > >> >>>> configurations. > >> >>> Acked-by: Andi Kleen > >> >>> > >> >>> This is far better than the original change it replaces and which > >> >>> I also objected to in review. > >> >>> > >> >> > >> >> So... do we think these two patches are sufficiently safe and important for > >> >> 2.6.25? > >> > > >> > It's only strictly needed for .26 I think for some (also slightly > >> > dubious) changes queued in git-x86. > >> > >> Does anything yet rely on this new free_bootmem() behaviour? If not, > >> the safest thing would be to just revert the original patch in mainline > >> and drop the second patch completely. > > > > 1. free_bootmem(ramdisk_image, ramdisk_size) in setup_arch of x86_64 > > need that > > 2. another patch in x86.git need that. > > Ok, to avoid confusion: we are talking about free_bootmem() iterating > over nodes and looking up an area WITHIN a node or free_bootmem() > freeing an area ACROSS nodes? > > The first is what my patch does _only_. Yes, your patch for free_bootmem only can free blocks in the same node. but the free_bootmem(ramdisk_image,...) in setup_arch could cross node... , and some other via reserve_early... for example two nodes, every node have 2G, and in case use memmap=NN$SS to execlude some memory on node1. the ramdisk could sit cross the boundary. YH