Re: [NUMA , x86_64] Why memnode_shift is chosen with the lowest possible value ?

On Friday 30 September 2005 11:09, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> +       while (populate_memnodemap(nodes, numnodes, shift + 1) >= 0)
> +               shift++;


Why shift+1 here? 


>+               if ((end >> shift) >= NODEMAPSIZE)
>+                       return 0;

This should be >, not >= shouldn't it?

-Andi

P.S.: Please cc x86-64 patches to [email protected]
-
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/

---

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: [NUMA , x86_64] Why memnode_shift is chosen with the lowest possible value ?
    • From: Eric Dumazet <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: what's next for the linux kernel?
• Next by Date: Re: what's next for the linux kernel?
• Previous by thread: [PATCH] bfs iget() abuses
• Next by thread: Re: [NUMA , x86_64] Why memnode_shift is chosen with the lowest possible value ?
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[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]