On Tue, Dec 15 2009, Jens Axboe wrote: > On Tue, Dec 15 2009, Yinghai Lu wrote: > > 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? > > Yes: > > CONFIG_NODES_SHIFT=6 > > What I don't get is that 2.6.32 and -git print the same PXM map, and in > both cases it's totalling exactly 64G. Yet it says: > > SRAT: PXMs only cover 49035MB of your 65419MB e820 RAM. Not used. Clue: [ 0.000000] SRAT: Node 0 PXM 0 0-80000000 [ 0.000000] SRAT: Node 0 PXM 0 100000000-480000000 [ 0.000000] SRAT: Node 2 PXM 1 480000000-880000000 [ 0.000000] SRAT: Node 1 PXM 2 880000000-c80000000 [ 0.000000] SRAT: Node 3 PXM 3 c80000000-1080000000 [ 0.000000] NUMA: Using 31 for the hash shift. [ 0.000000] pxm0: 0-480000 (4718592), absent 553990 [ 0.000000] pxm1: 880000-c80000 (4194304), absent 0 [ 0.000000] pxm2: 480000-880000 (4194304), absent 4194304 [ 0.000000] pxm3: c80000-1080000 (4194304), absent 0 [ 0.000000] SRAT: PXMs only cover 49035MB of your 65419MB e820 RAM. Not used. [ 0.000000] SRAT: SRAT not used. It's essentially disregarding pxm2, claiming all pages are absent. -- Jens Axboe -- 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
