From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Bjorn Helgaas Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] x86_64: Switch to SPARSE_VIRTUAL Date: Mon, 2 Apr 2007 17:03:19 -0600 References: <20070401071024.23757.4113.sendpatchset@schroedinger.engr.sgi.com> <200704011246.52238.ak@suse.de> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200704021703.19947.bjorn.helgaas@hp.com> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Christoph Lameter Cc: Andi Kleen , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, Martin Bligh , linux-mm@kvack.org, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki List-ID: On Monday 02 April 2007 09:37, Christoph Lameter wrote: > On Sun, 1 Apr 2007, Andi Kleen wrote: > > Hmm, this means there is at least 2MB worth of struct page on every node? > > Or do you have overlaps with other memory (I think you have) > > In that case you have to handle the overlap in change_page_attr() > > Correct. 2MB worth of struct page is 128 mb of memory. Are there nodes > with smaller amounts of memory? Do you deal with max_addr= and mem=? RHEL4 (2.6.9) blows up if max_addr= happens to leave you with CPU-only nodes. So hopefully you can deal with arbitrary-sized nodes caused by max_addr= or mem=. -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org