Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 30 Apr 2008 16:44:44 +0900 | From | KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <> | Subject | Re: sparc64 bootup regression... |
| |
On Wed, 30 Apr 2008 09:30:52 +0200 Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com> wrote: > > How about this ? If this is messy (or doesn't work), Goto-san will rework > > his own patch by himself. (this patch is against -mm but I think no HUNK to > > git tree) > > > > == > > This kind of page allocation, which specifies the address range, > > can fail easily. > > > > Signed-off-by: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiruyo@jp.fujitsu.com> > > > > Index: mm-2.6.25-mm1/mm/sparse.c > > =================================================================== > > --- mm-2.6.25-mm1.orig/mm/sparse.c > > +++ mm-2.6.25-mm1/mm/sparse.c > > @@ -264,10 +264,16 @@ static unsigned long *__init sparse_earl > > * To solve above issue, this collects all usemap on the same section > > * which has pgdat. > > */ > > +#ifdef CONFIG_NUMA /* contig_page_data for !NUMA case is not good to do this */ > > section_nr = pfn_to_section_nr(__pa(pgdat) >> PAGE_SHIFT); > > usemap = alloc_bootmem_section(usemap_size(), section_nr); > > if (usemap) > > return usemap; > > +#endif > > + /* above allocation can fail. */ > > + usemap = alloc_bootmem_node(NODE_DATA(nid), usemap_size()); > > + if (usemap) > > + return usemap; > > > > /* Stupid: suppress gcc warning for SPARSEMEM && !NUMA */ > > nid = 0; > > Fixes it on s390 at least. > Thanks, much help to understand what happens. BTW, s390 is CONFIG_NUMA or not ?
Regards, -Kame
| |