On (23/01/08 14:48), Andi Kleen didst pronounce: > On Wednesday 23 January 2008 12:24:36 Mel Gorman wrote: > > On (23/01/08 12:15), Andi Kleen didst pronounce: > > > Anyways from your earlier comments it sounds like you're trying to add > > > SRAT parsing to CONFIG_NUMAQ. Since that's redundant with the old > > > implementation it doesn't sound like a very useful thing to do. > > > > No, that would not be useful at all as it's redundant as you point out. The > > only reason to add it is if the Opteron box can figure out the CPU-to-node > > affinity. > > Assuming srat_32.c was fixed to not crash on Opteron it would likely > do that already without further changes. >
Understood. > > :| The patches applied so far are about increasing test coverage, not SRAT > > messing. > > Test coverage of the NUMAQ kernel? > NUMA in general. I don't really care about NUMAQ as such except that it continues to shake out the occasional bug that can be difficult to reproduce elsewhere. > If you wanted to increase test coverage of 32bit NUMA kernels the right > strategy would be to fix srat_32. > I will try and do that then instead of trying to merge the SRAT parsers. Based on this thread, my understanding is that an attempted merge would only open up a can of hurt, probably causing regressions in the process. -- Mel Gorman Part-time Phd Student Linux Technology Center University of Limerick IBM Dublin Software Lab -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/