Re: x86 patches was Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.24

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
From: Andrew Morton
Date: Monday, October 1, 2007 - 11:32 pm

On 02 Oct 2007 08:18:17 +0200 Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org> wrote:


I assume you're referring to just
convert-cpu_sibling_map-to-be-a-per-cpu-variable* here.


"Send", not "Sent".


You did?  I'd have dropped them if you had.

Oh well, I was planning on a maintainer patch-bombing tomorrow - let's go
through them again.


hm, well, I hope you and Thomas are on the same page regarding precisely
what the remaining issues are.


Thanks.


How come?  Memoryless node can and do occur in real-world machines.  Kernel
should support that?


Well that would be bad.

What's the issue here?  Both 32-bit and 64-bit userspace will see 64-bit
data.  So the problem is that 32-bit applications on 32-bit kernels will
see 32-bit data but 32-bit applications on 64-bit kernels will see 64-bit
data?

If so, that might be OK - the app just needs a reliable way of working out
whether it's on a 32- or 64-bit kernel?


So should I drop them?
-
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
-mm merge plans for 2.6.24, Andrew Morton, (Mon Oct 1, 2:22 pm)
wibbling over the cpuset shed domain connnection, Paul Jackson, (Mon Oct 1, 2:34 pm)
x86 patches was Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.24, Andi Kleen, (Mon Oct 1, 11:18 pm)
Re: x86 patches was Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.24, Andrew Morton, (Mon Oct 1, 11:32 pm)
Re: x86 patches was Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.24, Andi Kleen, (Tue Oct 2, 12:01 am)
Re: x86 patches was Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.24, Andrew Morton, (Tue Oct 2, 12:18 am)
Re: x86 patches was Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.24, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki, (Tue Oct 2, 12:36 am)
Re: x86 patches was Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.24, Ingo Molnar, (Tue Oct 2, 12:37 am)
Re: x86 patches was Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.24, Andrew Morton, (Tue Oct 2, 12:43 am)
Re: x86 patches was Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.24, Andi Kleen, (Tue Oct 2, 12:46 am)
Re: x86 patches was Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.24, Matt Mackall, (Tue Oct 2, 12:55 am)
Re: x86 patches was Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.24, Thomas Gleixner, (Tue Oct 2, 12:58 am)
Re: x86 patches was Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.24, Andi Kleen, (Tue Oct 2, 12:59 am)
v4l-stk11xx* [Was: -mm merge plans for 2.6.24], Jiri Slaby, (Tue Oct 2, 12:59 am)
Re: x86 patches was Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.24, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki, (Tue Oct 2, 1:16 am)
per BDI dirty limit (was Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.24), Peter Zijlstra, (Tue Oct 2, 1:17 am)
writeback fixes, Fengguang Wu, (Tue Oct 2, 1:39 am)
Re: x86 patches was Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.24, Andy Whitcroft, (Tue Oct 2, 2:26 am)
Re: x86 patches was Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.24, Yasunori Goto, (Tue Oct 2, 3:48 am)
Re: wibbling over the cpuset shed domain connnection, Nick Piggin, (Tue Oct 2, 5:36 am)
Re: wibbling over the cpuset shed domain connnection, Nick Piggin, (Tue Oct 2, 6:12 am)
Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.24, Pekka Enberg, (Tue Oct 2, 9:12 am)
new aops merge [was Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.24], Hugh Dickins, (Tue Oct 2, 9:21 am)
Re: x86 patches was Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.24, Nish Aravamudan, (Tue Oct 2, 9:40 am)
Re: x86 patches was Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.24, Lee Schermerhorn, (Tue Oct 2, 10:17 am)
Re: x86 patches was Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.24, Lee Schermerhorn, (Tue Oct 2, 10:25 am)
remove zero_page (was Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.24), Nick Piggin, (Tue Oct 2, 10:45 am)
Re: x86 patches was Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.24, Christoph Lameter, (Tue Oct 2, 11:16 am)
Re: x86 patches was Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.24, Christoph Lameter, (Tue Oct 2, 11:18 am)
Re: kswapd min order, slub max order [was Re: -mm merge pl ..., Christoph Lameter, (Tue Oct 2, 11:28 am)
Re: wibbling over the cpuset shed domain connnection, Paul Jackson, (Tue Oct 2, 10:21 pm)
Re: wibbling over the cpuset shed domain connnection, Paul Jackson, (Wed Oct 3, 12:00 am)
Re: wibbling over the cpuset shed domain connnection, Andrew Morton, (Wed Oct 3, 3:57 am)
Re: per BDI dirty limit (was Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.24), Martin Knoblauch, (Wed Oct 3, 4:00 am)
Re: remove zero_page (was Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.24), Linus Torvalds, (Wed Oct 3, 8:21 am)
r/o bind mounts, was Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.24, Christoph Hellwig, (Tue Oct 9, 2:19 am)
Re: remove zero_page (was Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.24), Linus Torvalds, (Tue Oct 9, 7:52 am)
Re: remove zero_page (was Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.24), Linus Torvalds, (Tue Oct 9, 7:22 pm)
Re: remove zero_page (was Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.24), Linus Torvalds, (Tue Oct 9, 8:06 pm)
Re: remove zero_page (was Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.24), Linus Torvalds, (Tue Oct 9, 10:20 pm)
Re: remove zero_page (was Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.24), Linus Torvalds, (Wed Oct 10, 8:04 am)
Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.24, Borislav Petkov, (Sat Oct 13, 1:44 am)
Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.24, Andrew Morton, (Sat Oct 13, 1:52 am)
Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.24, Borislav Petkov, (Sat Oct 13, 4:45 am)
Re: per BDI dirty limit (was Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.24), Trond Myklebust, (Fri Oct 26, 9:37 am)
[PATCH] mm: sysfs: expose the BDI object in sysfs, Peter Zijlstra, (Fri Nov 2, 7:59 am)