RE: [patch] fix per-CPU MCA mess and make UP kernels work again

From: David Mosberger <davidm_at_napali.hpl.hp.com>
Date: 2005-01-27 07:07:33
>>>>> On Wed, 26 Jan 2005 11:23:06 -0800, "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@intel.com> said:

  >> It seems logical to me that MCA data be close to the node/cpu
  >> using it, but workable if it is not.

  Tony> Since performance is not an issue here, and there isn't a
  Tony> functionality reason for allocating per-node, I'd vote for
  Tony> whatever is the cleanest code implementation.  Part of the pit
  Tony> I've dug myself into is caused by the complexity of the
  Tony> contig/discontig code ... if we can make it simpler, perhaps I
  Tony> won't break it all again.

I'm all for simplification, but with a better API, we could share code
and still have node-local data (which does feel intuitively right).

Can't we have a simple

	alloc_bootmem_for_cpu(cpu, size, align, goal)

which would take care of the difference?

(Yes, I know about alloc_bootmem_node(), but it wants a pgdat pointer,
which I couldn't care less about in the non-NUMA case.)

	--david
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ia64" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Received on Wed Jan 26 15:08:39 2005

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 2005-08-02 09:20:35 EST