On 12/12/2012 05:18 PM, Davidlohr Bueso wrote: > On Fri, 2012-12-07 at 16:17 -0800, Dave Hansen wrote: >> Seems like the better way to do this would be to expose the DIMMs >> themselves in some way, and then map _those_ back to a node. > > Good point, and from a DIMM perspective, I agree, and will look into > this. However, IMHO, having the range of physical addresses for every > node still provides valuable information, from a NUMA point of view. For > example, dealing with node related e820 mappings.
But if we went and did it per-DIMM (showing which physical addresses and NUMA nodes a DIMM maps to), wouldn't that be redundant with this proposed interface? How do you plan to use this in practice, btw? -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
