On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 9:38 AM, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
<konrad.wilk@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 09:12:57AM -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>> On 02/22/2013 08:55 AM, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
>> >
>> >What is bizzare is that I do recall testing this (and Stefano also did it).
>> >So I am not sure what has altered.
>> >
>>
>> Yes, there was a very specific reason why I wanted you guys to test it...
>
> Exactly. And I re-ran the same test, but with a new kernel. This is what
> git reflog tells me:
>
> 473cd24 HEAD@{75}: checkout: moving from 08f321ed97353cf3b3fafa6b1c1971d6a8970830 to linux-next
> 08f321e HEAD@{76}: checkout: moving from linux-next to yinghai/for-x86-mm
> eb827a7 HEAD@{77}: checkout: moving from 1b66ccf15ff4bd0200567e8d70446a8763f96ee7 to linux-next
> [konrad@build linux]$ git show 08f321e
> commit 08f321ed97353cf3b3fafa6b1c1971d6a8970830
> Author: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Thu Nov 8 00:00:19 2012 -0800
>
> mm: Kill NO_BOOTMEM version free_all_bootmem_node()
>
> And I recall Stefano later on testing (I was in a conference and did not have
> the opportunity to test it). Not sure what he ran with.
the commit in tip and linus tree have different hash...
commit 600cc5b7f6371706679490d7ee108015ae57ac2f
Author: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri Nov 16 19:39:22 2012 -0800
mm: Kill NO_BOOTMEM version free_all_bootmem_node()
Now NO_BOOTMEM version free_all_bootmem_node() does not really
do free_bootmem at all, and it only call register_page_bootmem_info_node
for online nodes instead.
