Jens Axboe wrote: > On Tue, Dec 15 2009, Jens Axboe wrote: >> On Tue, Dec 15 2009, Jens Axboe wrote: >>> On Tue, Dec 15 2009, Yinghai Lu wrote: >>>> Jens Axboe wrote: >>>>> On Tue, Dec 15 2009, Yinghai Lu wrote: >>>>>> Jens Axboe wrote: >>>>>>> On Tue, Dec 15 2009, Yinghai Lu wrote: >>>>>>>> Jens Axboe wrote: >>>>>>>>> On Tue, Dec 15 2009, Yinghai Lu wrote: >>>>>>>>>> [PATCH] x86/pci: intel ioh bus num reg accessing fix >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> it is above 0x100, so if mmconf is not enable, need to skip it >>>>>>>>> This works, it kexecs kernels fine. But since 2.6.32 doesn't have the >>>>>>>>> mmconf problem to begin with, are we now just working around the issue? >>>>>>>>> SRAT still reports issues, numa doesn't work. >>>>>>>> that patch will be bullet proof... we need it. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> also still need to figure out why memmap range is not passed properly. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> do you mean 2.6.32 kexec 2.6.32 it have worked mmconf and numa in >>>>>>>> second kernel? >>>>>>> Yes, 2.6.32 booted and 2.6.32 kexec'ed works just fine, no SRAT >>>>>>> complaints and NUMA works fine. >>>>>> do you need >>>>>> memmap=62G@4G >>>>>> in this case? >>>>> Yes, I've needed that always. >>>> good, >>>> >>>> can you enable debug option in kexec to see why kexec can not pass >>>> whole 38? range to second kernel? >>> Not getting any output so far, -d doesn't do much. Poking around in the >>> source... >> OK, cold boot and kexec 2.0.1 gets all 39 ranges passed properly to >> kexec'ed kernels. Since the older kexec stopped at range 30 (31 ranges >> total), that smells like just a kexec bug. Retesting -git... > > Current -git works fine when all the ranges are passed correctly. So, I > think, the only existing regression is the SRAT issue. did you change node_shift? YH -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pci" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
