On 14.12.16 09:11:47, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> The NUMA code may get confused by the presence of NOMAP regions within
> zones, resulting in spurious BUG() checks where the node id deviates
> from the containing zone's node id.
>
> Since the kernel has no business reasoning about node ids of pages i
On 6 January 2017 at 12:03, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 05, 2017 at 08:49:44PM +0100, Robert Richter wrote:
>> On 05.01.17 13:22:00, Robert Richter wrote:
>> > On 05.01.17 12:08:20, Will Deacon wrote:
>> > > I really can't see how the fix causes a crash, and I couldn't reproduce
>> > > it on
On Thu, Jan 05, 2017 at 08:49:44PM +0100, Robert Richter wrote:
> On 05.01.17 13:22:00, Robert Richter wrote:
> > On 05.01.17 12:08:20, Will Deacon wrote:
> > > I really can't see how the fix causes a crash, and I couldn't reproduce
> > > it on any of my boards, nor could any of the Linaro folk afa
On 05.01.17 13:22:00, Robert Richter wrote:
> On 05.01.17 12:08:20, Will Deacon wrote:
> > I really can't see how the fix causes a crash, and I couldn't reproduce
> > it on any of my boards, nor could any of the Linaro folk afaik. Are you
> > definitely running mainline with just these two patches
On 05.01.17 12:08:20, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 05, 2017 at 12:24:07PM +0100, Robert Richter wrote:
> > On 04.01.17 14:02:23, Will Deacon wrote:
> > > Using early_pfn_valid feels like a bodge to me, since having pfn_valid
> > > return false for something that early_pfn_valid says is valid (a
On Thu, Jan 05, 2017 at 12:24:07PM +0100, Robert Richter wrote:
> On 04.01.17 14:02:23, Will Deacon wrote:
> > Using early_pfn_valid feels like a bodge to me, since having pfn_valid
> > return false for something that early_pfn_valid says is valid (and is
> > therefore initialised in the memmap) ma
On 04.01.17 14:02:23, Will Deacon wrote:
> Using early_pfn_valid feels like a bodge to me, since having pfn_valid
> return false for something that early_pfn_valid says is valid (and is
> therefore initialised in the memmap) makes the NOMAP semantics even more
> confusing.
The concern I have had w
On Wed, Jan 04, 2017 at 01:50:20PM +, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> On 4 January 2017 at 13:28, Will Deacon wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 09:11:47AM +, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> >> The NUMA code may get confused by the presence of NOMAP regions within
> >> zones, resulting in spurious BUG() c
On 4 January 2017 at 13:28, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 09:11:47AM +, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
>> The NUMA code may get confused by the presence of NOMAP regions within
>> zones, resulting in spurious BUG() checks where the node id deviates
>> from the containing zone's node id.
On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 09:11:47AM +, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> The NUMA code may get confused by the presence of NOMAP regions within
> zones, resulting in spurious BUG() checks where the node id deviates
> from the containing zone's node id.
>
> Since the kernel has no business reasoning about
On 16.12.16 09:57:20, Hanjun Guo wrote:
> Hi Robert,
>
> On 2016/12/15 23:39, Robert Richter wrote:
> >I was going to do some measurements but my kernel crashes now with a
> >page fault in efi_rtc_probe():
> >
> >[ 21.663393] Unable to handle kernel paging request at virtual address
> >20251000
On 15.12.16 16:07:26, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> On 15 December 2016 at 15:39, Robert Richter
> wrote:
> > I was going to do some measurements but my kernel crashes now with a
> > page fault in efi_rtc_probe():
> >
> > [ 21.663393] Unable to handle kernel paging request at virtual address
> > 202
Hi Robert,
On 2016/12/15 23:39, Robert Richter wrote:
I was going to do some measurements but my kernel crashes now with a
page fault in efi_rtc_probe():
[ 21.663393] Unable to handle kernel paging request at virtual address
20251000
[ 21.663396] pgd = 0909
[ 21.663401] [2025
On 15 December 2016 at 15:39, Robert Richter wrote:
> I was going to do some measurements but my kernel crashes now with a
> page fault in efi_rtc_probe():
>
> [ 21.663393] Unable to handle kernel paging request at virtual address
> 20251000
> [ 21.663396] pgd = 0909
> [ 21.6634
I was going to do some measurements but my kernel crashes now with a
page fault in efi_rtc_probe():
[ 21.663393] Unable to handle kernel paging request at virtual address
20251000
[ 21.663396] pgd = 0909
[ 21.663401] [20251000] *pgd=01090003
[ 21.663402] , *pud=010
The NUMA code may get confused by the presence of NOMAP regions within
zones, resulting in spurious BUG() checks where the node id deviates
from the containing zone's node id.
Since the kernel has no business reasoning about node ids of pages it
does not own in the first place, enable CONFIG_HOLES
16 matches
Mail list logo
