On Feb 7, 2008 12:09 AM, Ingo Molnar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > * Yinghai Lu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > [PATCH] x86_64: fix page table size > > > Entering add_active_range(0, 1048576, 67239936) 2 entries of 3200 used > > end_pfn_map = 67239936 > > Kernel panic - not syncing: Overlapping early reservations 8000-109fff > > PGTABLE to 9bc00-9dbff EBDA > > > > change back the logic. we DO need extra space for pmds when > > direct_gbpages is not there. > > > @@ -370,7 +370,7 @@ static void __init find_early_table_space(unsigned long > > end) > > > > puds = (end + PUD_SIZE - 1) >> PUD_SHIFT; > > tables = round_up(puds * sizeof(pud_t), PAGE_SIZE); > > - if (direct_gbpages) { > > + if (!direct_gbpages) { > > thanks Yinghai, applied! > > I'm wondering why this bug didnt trigger more widely. It seems to me it > needs some serious amount of RAM to trigger this bug - correct?
yes. need 256g. 128g without patch it still work. because round_up(.., PAGE_SIZE) get some extra. > > btw., it would be nice to have some "lots of RAM simulation" debugging > code which would just _fake_ a really large e820 map and would in the > end throw away the 'fake' pages later during bootup. Perhaps tell the > early allocator to never allocate into these fake areas [via an struct > e820 entry flag], but all our sizing code and the boot bitmaps, etc. > would be sized accordingly, as if we had this much RAM - and we'd > trigger these nuances. We could put this into a new "fakemem=128GB" boot > option and hence we could boot with fakemem=128GB on a 2GB box and could > at least hope to be able to boot [with some serious amount of RAM wasted > on over-sized pagetables, allocator bitmaps and mem_map[]]. Hm? sound interesting. but need some variable to prevent using non exist page. YH -- 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/