On Mon, Sep 02, 2019 at 03:51:25PM +0200, Michal Simek wrote:
> On 31. 07. 19 19:15, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 31, 2019 at 04:41:14PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> >> On Wed 31-07-19 17:21:29, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> >>> On Wed, Jul 31, 2019 at 03:00:37PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
>
On 31. 07. 19 19:15, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 31, 2019 at 04:41:14PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
>> On Wed 31-07-19 17:21:29, Mike Rapoport wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jul 31, 2019 at 03:00:37PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
I am sorry, but I still do not follow. Who is consuming that node i
On 7/31/19 10:15 AM, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 31, 2019 at 04:41:14PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
>> On Wed 31-07-19 17:21:29, Mike Rapoport wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jul 31, 2019 at 03:00:37PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
I am sorry, but I still do not follow. Who is consuming that node i
On Wed, Jul 31, 2019 at 04:41:14PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Wed 31-07-19 17:21:29, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 31, 2019 at 03:00:37PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > >
> > > I am sorry, but I still do not follow. Who is consuming that node id
> > > information when NUMA=n. In other
On Wed 31-07-19 17:21:29, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 31, 2019 at 03:00:37PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > On Wed 31-07-19 15:26:32, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> > > On Wed, Jul 31, 2019 at 01:40:16PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > > > On Wed 31-07-19 14:14:22, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> > > > > On W
On Wed, Jul 31, 2019 at 03:00:37PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Wed 31-07-19 15:26:32, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 31, 2019 at 01:40:16PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > > On Wed 31-07-19 14:14:22, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Jul 31, 2019 at 10:03:09AM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
On Wed 31-07-19 15:26:32, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 31, 2019 at 01:40:16PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > On Wed 31-07-19 14:14:22, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> > > On Wed, Jul 31, 2019 at 10:03:09AM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > > > On Wed 31-07-19 09:24:21, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> > > > > [ so
On Wed, Jul 31, 2019 at 01:40:16PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Wed 31-07-19 14:14:22, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 31, 2019 at 10:03:09AM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > > On Wed 31-07-19 09:24:21, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> > > > [ sorry for a late reply too, somehow I missed this thread be
On Wed 31-07-19 14:14:22, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 31, 2019 at 10:03:09AM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > On Wed 31-07-19 09:24:21, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> > > [ sorry for a late reply too, somehow I missed this thread before ]
> > >
> > > On Tue, Jul 30, 2019 at 10:14:15AM +0200, Michal H
On Wed, Jul 31, 2019 at 10:03:09AM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Wed 31-07-19 09:24:21, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> > [ sorry for a late reply too, somehow I missed this thread before ]
> >
> > On Tue, Jul 30, 2019 at 10:14:15AM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > > [Sorry for a late reply]
> > >
> > > O
On Wed 31-07-19 09:24:21, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> [ sorry for a late reply too, somehow I missed this thread before ]
>
> On Tue, Jul 30, 2019 at 10:14:15AM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > [Sorry for a late reply]
> >
> > On Mon 15-07-19 17:55:07, Hoan Tran OS wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > On 7/12/
[ sorry for a late reply too, somehow I missed this thread before ]
On Tue, Jul 30, 2019 at 10:14:15AM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> [Sorry for a late reply]
>
> On Mon 15-07-19 17:55:07, Hoan Tran OS wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On 7/12/19 10:00 PM, Michal Hocko wrote:
> [...]
> > > Hmm, I thought thi
Hi,
On 7/30/19 1:14 AM, Michal Hocko wrote:
> [Sorry for a late reply]
>
> On Mon 15-07-19 17:55:07, Hoan Tran OS wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On 7/12/19 10:00 PM, Michal Hocko wrote:
> [...]
>>> Hmm, I thought this was selectable. But I am obviously wrong here.
>>> Looking more closely, it seems that thi
[Sorry for a late reply]
On Mon 15-07-19 17:55:07, Hoan Tran OS wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 7/12/19 10:00 PM, Michal Hocko wrote:
[...]
> > Hmm, I thought this was selectable. But I am obviously wrong here.
> > Looking more closely, it seems that this is indeed only about
> > __early_pfn_to_nid and as su
Hi,
On 7/12/19 10:00 PM, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Fri 12-07-19 15:37:30, Will Deacon wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> On Fri, Jul 12, 2019 at 02:12:23PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
>>> On Fri 12-07-19 10:56:47, Hoan Tran OS wrote:
>>> [...]
It would be good if we can enable it by-default. Otherwise, le
On Fri 12-07-19 15:37:30, Will Deacon wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> On Fri, Jul 12, 2019 at 02:12:23PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > On Fri 12-07-19 10:56:47, Hoan Tran OS wrote:
> > [...]
> > > It would be good if we can enable it by-default. Otherwise, let arch
> > > enables it by them-self. Do you hav
Hi all,
On Fri, Jul 12, 2019 at 02:12:23PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Fri 12-07-19 10:56:47, Hoan Tran OS wrote:
> [...]
> > It would be good if we can enable it by-default. Otherwise, let arch
> > enables it by them-self. Do you have any suggestions?
>
> I can hardly make any suggestions w
On Fri 12-07-19 10:56:47, Hoan Tran OS wrote:
[...]
> It would be good if we can enable it by-default. Otherwise, let arch
> enables it by them-self. Do you have any suggestions?
I can hardly make any suggestions when it is not really clear _why_ you
want to remove this config option in the first
Hi,
On 7/12/19 2:02 PM, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Thu 11-07-19 23:25:44, Hoan Tran OS wrote:
>> In NUMA layout which nodes have memory ranges that span across other nodes,
>> the mm driver can detect the memory node id incorrectly.
>>
>> For example, with layout below
>> Node 0 address: 0
On Thu 11-07-19 23:25:44, Hoan Tran OS wrote:
> In NUMA layout which nodes have memory ranges that span across other nodes,
> the mm driver can detect the memory node id incorrectly.
>
> For example, with layout below
> Node 0 address:
> Node 1 address:
>
>
On Thu, Jul 11, 2019 at 11:25:44PM +, Hoan Tran OS wrote:
> In NUMA layout which nodes have memory ranges that span across other nodes,
> the mm driver can detect the memory node id incorrectly.
>
> For example, with layout below
> Node 0 address:
> Node 1 address: 111
In NUMA layout which nodes have memory ranges that span across other nodes,
the mm driver can detect the memory node id incorrectly.
For example, with layout below
Node 0 address:
Node 1 address:
Note:
- Memory from low to high
- 0/1: Node id
- x: Invali
22 matches
Mail list logo