| |
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
xen-devel
Re: [Xen-devel] PVops domain 0 crash on NUMA system only Node==1 present
|
To: |
Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@xxxxxxxx> |
|
Subject: |
Re: [Xen-devel] PVops domain 0 crash on NUMA system only Node==1 present (Was: Re: Bug#603632: linux-image-2.6.32-5-xen-amd64: Linux kernel 2.6.32/xen/amd64 booting fine on bare metal, but not as dom0 with Xen 4.0.1 (Dell R410)) |
|
From: |
Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@xxxxxxxxxx> |
|
Date: |
Fri, 3 Dec 2010 09:49:24 +0000 |
|
Cc: |
xen-devel <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Keir Fraser <keir@xxxxxxx>, Vincent CARON <zerodeux@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, Vincent Caron <vcaron@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Cris Daniluk <cris.daniluk@xxxxxxxxx>, "603632@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <603632@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|
Delivery-date: |
Fri, 03 Dec 2010 01:50:25 -0800 |
|
Envelope-to: |
www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
|
In-reply-to: |
<1291366377.5514.15046.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|
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> |
|
Organization: |
Citrix Systems, Inc. |
|
References: |
<20101115233253.11935.35707.reportbug@zerohal> <1290513067.31507.7699.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1290538327.9844.26.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1290550323.9844.85.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1290550726.9844.90.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1291333639.25131.48.camel@zerohal> <4CF83606.6050904@xxxxxxxx> <1291366377.5514.15046.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|
Sender: |
xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
On Fri, 2010-12-03 at 08:52 +0000, Ian Campbell wrote:
>
> > IanC: it looks like passing a node id of "-1" is the correct way to
> > say "I don't care".
>
> I thought so too but convinced myself from staring at the code that it
> wouldn't work in this case -- I'll double check before I resubmit.
I was mislead because node gets placed verbatim into desc->node which at
first glance seemed invalid but on second look it seems to be fine,
everything which reads that value is prepared to accept the -1. There is
precedent for using -1 in hpet_assign_irq, although most other places
seem to use numa_node_id().
I've tested with -1 and it seems ok. I see (too late) that you've
already made the change so I guess you knew this ;-)
Are you going to put this change into next-2.6.32 as well as 37?
Ian.
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
|
|
| |
|
Home