On Tue, 2010-09-28 at 04:29 -0500, Robin Holt wrote: > Also, I don't think I much care for the weirdness that occurs if a > memory block spans two nodes. I have not thought through how possible > (or likely) this is, but the code certainly permits it. If that were > the case, how would we know which sections need to be taken offline, > etc? Since the architecture is the one doing the memory_block_size_bytes() override, I'd expect that the per-arch code knows enough to ensure that this doesn't happen. It's probably something to add to the documentation or the patch descriptions. "How should an architecture define this? When should it be overridden?" It's just like the question of SECTION_SIZE. What if a section spans a node? Well, they don't because the sections are a software concept and we _define_ them to not be able to cross nodes. If they do, just make them smaller. -- Dave -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxx For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>