WARNING - OLD ARCHIVES

This is an archived copy of the Xen.org mailing list, which we have preserved to ensure that existing links to archives are not broken. The live archive, which contains the latest emails, can be found at http://lists.xen.org/
   
 
 
Xen 
 
Home Products Support Community News
 
   
 

xen-devel

Re: [Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH] to fix ACPI slit table access at runtime

To: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH] to fix ACPI slit table access at runtime
From: Keir Fraser <keir.fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 25 Feb 2010 13:16:42 +0000
Cc: "xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Ian Jackson <Ian.Jackson@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Delivery-date: Thu, 25 Feb 2010 05:17:23 -0800
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <4B868329020000780003144E@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
List-help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>
List-post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Thread-index: Acq2GukTRa4pMlR7QiOml37QvErtnQAAdxJ2
Thread-topic: [Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH] to fix ACPI slit table access at runtime
User-agent: Microsoft-Entourage/12.23.0.091001
On 25/02/2010 13:03, "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Removing the code for 32-bit altogether is certainly one option (in
> that case I'd want to see _memnodemap to be reasonably
> increased though, plus we should probably make an attempt to
> reduce memnodemapsize again - the hash shift currently is unduly
> small - and I have a patch for the original Linux code to do so).
> 
> All other options are likely indeed not worth it to make 32-bit
> happy.

Given we agree the current situation is a bug, could you make up a patch
along the lines of what you prefer to see? Because my default action will be
simply to ifdef the code, as NUMA-on-i386 is not much a concern of mine.

 -- Keir



_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel