From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756786AbXKTDuR (ORCPT ); Mon, 19 Nov 2007 22:50:17 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754644AbXKTDuD (ORCPT ); Mon, 19 Nov 2007 22:50:03 -0500 Received: from netops-testserver-3-out.sgi.com ([192.48.171.28]:43816 "EHLO relay.sgi.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754508AbXKTDuC (ORCPT ); Mon, 19 Nov 2007 22:50:02 -0500 Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2007 19:50:01 -0800 (PST) From: Christoph Lameter X-X-Sender: clameter@schroedinger.engr.sgi.com To: Andi Kleen cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, travis@sgi.com, Mathieu Desnoyers , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [rfc 08/45] cpu alloc: x86 support In-Reply-To: <200711200416.32954.ak@suse.de> Message-ID: References: <20071120011132.143632442@sgi.com> <20071120011333.619991903@sgi.com> <200711200416.32954.ak@suse.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 20 Nov 2007, Andi Kleen wrote: > I might be pointing out the obvious, but on x86-64 there is definitely not > 256TB of VM available for this. Well maybe in the future. One of the issues that I ran into is that I had to place the cpu area in between to make the offsets link right. However, it would be best if the cpuarea came *after* the modules area. We only need linking that covers the per cpu area of processor 0. So I think we have a 2GB area right? 1GB kernel 1GB - 1x per cpu area (128M?) modules? cpu aree 0 ---- 2GB limit cpu area 1 cpu area 2 .... For that we would need to move the kernel down a bit. Can we do that?