From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752139Ab2INQYg (ORCPT ); Fri, 14 Sep 2012 12:24:36 -0400 Received: from mga11.intel.com ([192.55.52.93]:56060 "EHLO mga11.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751004Ab2INQYe convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Fri, 14 Sep 2012 12:24:34 -0400 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.80,423,1344236400"; d="scan'208";a="222224328" From: "Luck, Tony" To: Mel Gorman , qiuxishi CC: "akpm@linux-foundation.org" , Jiang Liu , "qiuxishi@huawei.com" , "bessel.wang@huawei.com" , "wujianguo@huawei.com" , "paul.gortmaker@windriver.com" , "kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com" , "kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com" , "rientjes@google.com" , Minchan Kim , "linux-mm@kvack.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Wen Congyang Subject: RE: [PATCH RESEND] memory hotplug: fix a double register section info bug Thread-Topic: [PATCH RESEND] memory hotplug: fix a double register section info bug Thread-Index: AQHNkisIAn0xa3laO0OcIuirYJu0E5eKDlEA///2rhA= Date: Fri, 14 Sep 2012 16:24:32 +0000 Message-ID: <3908561D78D1C84285E8C5FCA982C28F19D40E81@ORSMSX108.amr.corp.intel.com> References: <5052A7DF.4050301@gmail.com> <20120914095230.GE11266@suse.de> In-Reply-To: <20120914095230.GE11266@suse.de> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.22.254.140] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > This is an unusual configuration but it's not unheard of. PPC64 in rare > (and usually broken) configurations can have one node span another. Tony > should know if such a configuration is normally allowed on Itanium or if > this should be considered a platform bug. Tony? We definitely have platforms where the physical memory on node 0 that we skipped to leave physical address space for PCI mem mapped devices gets tagged back at the very top of memory, after other nodes. E.g. A 2-node system with 8G on each might look like this: 0-2G RAM on node 0 2G-4G PCI map space 4G-8G RAM on node 0 8G-16GRAM on node 1 16G-18G RAM on node 0 Is this the situation that we are talking about? Or something different? -Tony