Re: [PATCH] [30/30] x86_64: Add missing !X86_PAE dependincy to the 2G/2G split.

[Eric Dumazet <dada1@cosmosbay.com>]

Bill Irwin a écrit :
> On Tue, May 01, 2007 at 06:26:23AM +0200, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> > > Hum... We lose a usefull 2G/2G split. Should'nt we use a patch to change 
> > > PAGE_OFFSET to 0x8000000 instead of 0x78000000 and keep 2G/2G split ?
>
> On Tue, May 01, 2007 at 08:21:32AM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > I dropped the patch for now.
>
> I'm more miffed about what it's cleaning up after than the patch itself.
>
>
> On Tue, May 01, 2007 at 06:26:23AM +0200, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> > > [PATCH] i386 : Adjust CONFIG_PAGE_OFFSET in case of 2G/2G split and X86_PAE
> > > When in PAE mode we require that the user kernel divide to be
> > > on a 1G boundary.  We must therefore make sure PAGE_OFFSET is correctlty 
> > > defined in the 2G/2G split and PAE mode.
>
> On Tue, May 01, 2007 at 08:21:32AM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > Looks reasonable. Did you test both cases? wli, ok for you too?
>
> Sorry about the delay in replying.
>
> I don't mind so long as we're not letting doorstop configs through. I'd
> probably do something more like
>
> Index: sched/arch/i386/Kconfig
> ===================================================================
> --- sched.orig/arch/i386/Kconfig	2007-05-01 04:35:47.065162310 -0700
> +++ sched/arch/i386/Kconfig	2007-05-01 04:36:50.100754504 -0700
> @@ -571,6 +571,9 @@
>  		bool "3G/1G user/kernel split (for full 1G low memory)"
>  	config VMSPLIT_2G
>  		bool "2G/2G user/kernel split"
> +	config VMSPLIT_2G_OPT
> +		depends on !HIGHMEM
> +		bool "2G/2G user/kernel split (for full 2G low memory)"
>  	config VMSPLIT_1G
>  		bool "1G/3G user/kernel split"
>  endchoice
> @@ -578,7 +581,8 @@
>  config PAGE_OFFSET
>  	hex
>  	default 0xB0000000 if VMSPLIT_3G_OPT
> -	default 0x78000000 if VMSPLIT_2G
> +	default 0x80000000 if VMSPLIT_2G
> +	default 0x78000000 if VMSPLIT_2G_OPT
>  	default 0x40000000 if VMSPLIT_1G
>  	default 0xC0000000
>  
> as a stopgap measure, but I'm not all that interested in grabbing patch
> credits where others could do it easily enough. Either of the config
> alterations is fine by me as they now stand; maybe Eric Dumazet might
> care to do something like my suggestion at some point.

Your patch is very fine Bill, please resubmit it with proper Signed-off-by

My first patch was a trivial reaction to try to keep alive 2G/2G split, yours 
is better for fine tuning.

Thank you


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/