On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 07:15:41AM +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
What is that business with a command line argument ? Do that mean that
we'll need some magic command line argument to properly handle LPC memory
on CAPI devices or GPUs ? If yes that's bad ... kernel arguments should
be a las
On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 07:12:31AM +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
In any case, if the memory hasn't been hotplug, this shouldn't be
necessary as we shouldn't be considering it for allocation.
Right. To be clear, the background info I put in the commit log refers
to x86, where the SRAT ca
On 09/23/2016 09:02 AM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Thu, 22 Sep 2016, Waiman Long wrote:
Locking was done mostly by lock stealing. This is where most of the
performance benefit comes from, not optimistic spinning.
How does the lock latency distribution of all this look like and how fair
is the wh
On 09/23/2016 09:28 PM, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
+#ifdef CONFIG_RT_MUTEX_SPIN_ON_OWNER
+static bool rt_mutex_spin_on_owner(struct rt_mutex *lock,
+ struct task_struct *owner)
+{
+bool ret = true;
+
+/*
+ * The last owner could have just released the lock,
+ * imme
On Sun, 2016-09-25 at 13:36 -0500, Reza Arbab wrote:
> To create a movable node, we need to hotplug all of its memory into
> ZONE_MOVABLE.
>
> Note that to do this, auto_online_blocks should be off. Since the memory
> will first be added to the default zone, we must explicitly use
> online_movable
On Sun, 2016-09-25 at 13:36 -0500, Reza Arbab wrote:
> At boot, the movable_node option sets bottom-up memblock allocation.
>
> This reduces the chance that, in the window before movable memory has
> been identified, an allocation for the kernel might come from a movable
> node. By going bottom-up
On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 09:17:43PM +0530, Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote:
+ /* bottom-up allocation may have been set by movable_node */
+ memblock_set_bottom_up(false);
+
By then we have done few memblock allocation right ?
Yes, some allocations do occur while bottom-up is set.
IMHO, we
On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 11:40 AM, Shuah Khan wrote:
> This patch series contains the last 2 patches to complete moving runnable
> code from Documentation to selftests, samples, and tools.
>
> The first patch moves blackfin gptimers-example to samples and removes
> CONFIG_BUILD_DOCSRC.
>
> The seco
Update 00-INDEX files with the current file list to reflect the runnable
code move.
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan
---
Documentation/00-INDEX | 2 --
Documentation/arm/00-INDEX | 2 --
Documentation/filesystems/00-INDEX | 2 --
Documentation/networking/00-INDEX | 2 --
Documentat
Move blackfin gptimers-example to samples and remove it from Documentation
Makefile. Update samples Kconfig and Makefile to build gptimers-example.
blackfin is the last CONFIG_BUILD_DOCSRC target in Documentation/Makefile,
hence this patch also includes changes to remove CONFIG_BUILD_DOCSRC from
M
This patch series contains the last 2 patches to complete moving runnable
code from Documentation to selftests, samples, and tools.
The first patch moves blackfin gptimers-example to samples and removes
CONFIG_BUILD_DOCSRC.
The second one updates 00-INDEX files under Documentation to reflect the
Reza Arbab writes:
> To create a movable node, we need to hotplug all of its memory into
> ZONE_MOVABLE.
>
> Note that to do this, auto_online_blocks should be off. Since the memory
> will first be added to the default zone, we must explicitly use
> online_movable to online.
>
> Because such a no
Reza Arbab writes:
> At boot, the movable_node option sets bottom-up memblock allocation.
>
> This reduces the chance that, in the window before movable memory has
> been identified, an allocation for the kernel might come from a movable
> node. By going bottom-up, early allocations will most lik
13 matches
Mail list logo
