On Wed, 2005-09-07 at 23:11 -0700, Martin J. Bligh wrote: > >> >> CONFIG_NUMA was meant to (and did at one point) support both NUMA and > >> >> flat > >> >> machines. This is essential in order for the distros to support it - > >> >> same > >> >> will go for sparsemem. > >> > > >> > That's a different issue. The current code works if you boot a NUMA=y > >> > SPARSEMEM=y machine with a single node. The current Kconfig options > >> > also enforce that SPARSEMEM depends on NUMA on i386. > >> > > >> > Magnus would like to enable SPARSEMEM=y while CONFIG_NUMA=n. That > >> > requires some Kconfig changes, as well as an extra memory present call. > >> > I'm questioning why we need to do that when we could never do > >> > DISCONTIG=y while NUMA=n on i386. > >> > >> Ah, OK - makes more sense. However, some machines do have large holes > >> in e820 map setups - is not really critical, more of an efficiency > >> thing. > > > > Confused. Does all this mean that we want the patch, or not? > > >From that POV, nothing urgent, and would require more work to make use > of it anyway. Not sure if Magnus had another more immediate use for it?
Just wanted to make sure that both versions of setup_memory() behaved in a similar way and they both called memory_present(). But nothing urgent, and no immediate use. / magnus - 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/
