On Mon, Feb 08, 2010 at 03:24:22PM +1100, David Gibson wrote: > On Thu, Feb 04, 2010 at 09:02:18PM +0000, Eric B. Munson wrote: > > elflink.c tests slice boundaries for all architectures, but this is > > not necessary on x86[_64] as there are no rules for placement of > > huge pages with respect to small pages. This patch addes a define > > that will skip this check on x86[_64] builds. > > Hrm. The x86 versions of hugetlb_slice_end() and so forth are already > supposed to make this check a nop. We shouldn't need to ifdef this > out. >
I think the problem may be with the definition of ALIGN_UP ALIGN_UP(x,a) (((x) + (a)) & ~((a) - 1)) If the address is already aligned, does this definition not mean that ALIGN_UP will return a value one hugepage higher than it should? Prehaps the real definition should have been ALIGN_UP(x,a) (((x) + (a) - 1) & ~((a) - 1)) Eric, could you check what the old and rounded values are and see are the alignment macros screwing things up? If so and the problem is with ALIGN_UP, try this version. -- Mel Gorman Part-time Phd Student Linux Technology Center University of Limerick IBM Dublin Software Lab ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ The Planet: dedicated and managed hosting, cloud storage, colocation Stay online with enterprise data centers and the best network in the business Choose flexible plans and management services without long-term contracts Personal 24x7 support from experience hosting pros just a phone call away. http://p.sf.net/sfu/theplanet-com _______________________________________________ Libhugetlbfs-devel mailing list Libhugetlbfs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/libhugetlbfs-devel
