On Thu, 03 Aug 2006 21:25:34 -0700
keith mannthey <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Fri, 2006-08-04 at 12:48 +0900, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote:
> > On Thu, 03 Aug 2006 20:23:46 -0700
> > keith mannthey <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > What keeps 0xa0000000 to 0xa1000000 from being re-onlined by a bad call
> > > > > to add_memory?
> > > >
> > > > Usual sparsemem's add_memory() checks whether there are sections in
> > > > sparse_add_one_section(). then add_pages() returns -EEXIST (nothing to do).
> > > > And ioresouce collision check will finally find collision because 0-0xbffffff
> > > > resource will conflict with 0xa0000000 to 0xa10000000 area.
> > > > But, x86_64 's (not sparsemem) add_pages() doen't do collision check, so it panics.
> > >
> > > I have paniced with your 5 patches while doing SPARSMEM.... I think
> > > your 6th patch address the issues I was seeing.
> > >
>
>
> with the 6 patches things work as expected. It is nice to have the
> sysfs devices online the correct amount of memory.
>
> I was broken without this patch because invalid add_memory calls are
> made on by box (yet another issue) during boot.
>
> I will build my patch set on top of your 6 patches.
>
Okay, thank you very much !
-Kame
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
