Re: [Patch] min_low_pfn and max_low_pfn calcultion fix

From: Magnus Damm <magnus.damm_at_gmail.com>
Date: 2007-03-14 15:38:54
On 3/13/07, Jay Lan <jlan@sgi.com> wrote:
> Magnus Damm wrote:
> > On 28 Feb 2007 07:38:55 +0800, Zou Nan hai <nanhai.zou@intel.com> wrote:
> >>
> [excessive text deleted]
>
> >>   So it is better to fix and clean up those issues.
> >> Calculate min_low_pfn and max_low_pfn in a consistent way.
> >>
> >> Below is the patch, please review and comments
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by:  Zou Nan hai <nanhai.zou@intel.com>
> >
> > I've seen similar problems on a HP rx2620 box using 2.6.20. I managed
> > to resolve that problem with a patch similar to this one, but then I
> > realized that the issue I was seeing had been solved already by some
> > mm-related patch by Bob Picco that got included in 2.6.21-rc1.
>
> I tested on 2.6.21-rc3 with DEBUG_VM turned on. The vanilla 2.6.21-rc3
> without Nan-hai's patch, panicked on bugcheck on free_initmem->free_page
> as predicted. We still need this patch.

Ok, thanks for testing. =)

> However, the zero-size vmcore problem is back on SN. But that is a
> dfiffernet problem.

Argh, more problems...

/ magnus
-
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 Mar 14 15:39:41 2007

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 2007-03-14 15:39:56 EST