* Yinghai Lu <yinghai@kernel.org> wrote:

quoted text
> --- linux-2.6.orig/arch/x86/mm/init_32.c
> +++ linux-2.6/arch/x86/mm/init_32.c
> @@ -875,7 +875,12 @@ void __init mem_init(void)
>  	BUG_ON(!mem_map);
>  #endif
>  	/* this will put all low memory onto the freelists */
> +#if defined(CONFIG_NO_BOOTMEM) && defined(MAX_NUMNODES)
> +	/* In case some 32bit systems don't have RAM installed on node0 */
> +        totalram_pages += free_all_memory_core_early(MAX_NUMNODES);

(Note: tab whitespace damage)

quoted text
> +#else
>  	totalram_pages += free_all_bootmem();

So we get into this branch if CONFIG_NO_BOOTMEM is enabled but MAX_NUMNODES is 
not defined? Doesnt look right.

quoted text
> +#endif

Btw., and i said this before, i absolutely hate the CONFIG_NO_BOOTMEM naming 
as well (a negative in the option), but it is was what expresses the 'this is 
where we want to go' state better and thus CONFIG_NO_BOOTMEM removal will be a 
straight removal instead of a removal of the inverse.

Thanks,

	Ingo
--
unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/