From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-pa0-f52.google.com (mail-pa0-f52.google.com [209.85.220.52]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EBFE26B0038 for ; Thu, 22 Oct 2015 21:01:20 -0400 (EDT) Received: by pabrc13 with SMTP id rc13so101269149pab.0 for ; Thu, 22 Oct 2015 18:01:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mgwkm03.jp.fujitsu.com (mgwkm03.jp.fujitsu.com. [202.219.69.170]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id fg5si25178724pbc.5.2015.10.22.18.01.19 for (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 22 Oct 2015 18:01:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from g01jpfmpwyt03.exch.g01.fujitsu.local (g01jpfmpwyt03.exch.g01.fujitsu.local [10.128.193.57]) by kw-mxoi2.gw.nic.fujitsu.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C274EAC01DA for ; Fri, 23 Oct 2015 10:01:14 +0900 (JST) From: "Izumi, Taku" Subject: RE: [PATCH] mm: Introduce kernelcore=reliable option Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2015 01:01:12 +0000 Message-ID: References: <1444915942-15281-1-git-send-email-izumi.taku@jp.fujitsu.com> <3908561D78D1C84285E8C5FCA982C28F32B5A060@ORSMSX114.amr.corp.intel.com> <5628B427.3050403@jp.fujitsu.com> <3908561D78D1C84285E8C5FCA982C28F32B5C7AE@ORSMSX114.amr.corp.intel.com> In-Reply-To: <3908561D78D1C84285E8C5FCA982C28F32B5C7AE@ORSMSX114.amr.corp.intel.com> Content-Language: ja-JP Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-2022-jp" MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: "Luck, Tony" , "Kamezawa, Hiroyuki" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-mm@kvack.org" Cc: "qiuxishi@huawei.com" , "mel@csn.ul.ie" , "akpm@linux-foundation.org" , "Hansen, Dave" , "matt@codeblueprint.co.uk" Dear Tony, > -----Original Message----- > From: Luck, Tony [mailto:tony.luck@intel.com] > Sent: Friday, October 23, 2015 8:27 AM > To: Kamezawa, Hiroyuki/亀澤 寛之; Izumi, Taku/泉 拓; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; linux-mm@kvack.org > Cc: qiuxishi@huawei.com; mel@csn.ul.ie; akpm@linux-foundation.org; Hansen, Dave; matt@codeblueprint.co.uk > Subject: RE: [PATCH] mm: Introduce kernelcore=reliable option > > > I think /proc/zoneinfo can show detailed numbers per zone. Do we need some for meminfo ? > > I wrote a little script (attached) to summarize /proc/zoneinfo ... on my system it says > > $ zoneinfo > Node Normal Movable DMA DMA32 > 0 0.00 103020.07 8.94 1554.46 > 1 9284.54 89870.43 > 2 9626.33 94050.09 > 3 9602.82 93650.04 > > Not sure why I have zero Normal memory free on node0. The sum of all those > free counts is 410667.72 MB ... which is close enough to the boot time message > showing the amount of mirror/total memory: > > [ 0.000000] efi: Memory: 80979/420096M mirrored memory > > but a fair amount of the 80G of mirrored memory seems to have been miscounted > as Movable instead of Normal. Perhaps this is because I have two blocks of mirrored > memory on each node and the movable zone code doesn't expect that? You were saying that OS view of memory of node is something like the following ? Node X: |MMMMMM------MMMMMM--------| (legend) M: mirrored -: not mirrrored If so, is this a real Box's configuration? Sorry, I haven't got a real Address Range Mirror capable boxes yet ... I thought mirroring range is concatenated at the first part of each node. Sincerely, Taku Izumi -- 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