On 01/24/2014 09:45 AM, Yinghai Lu wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 7:01 AM, Dave Hansen <[email protected]> wrote:
>> There are two failure modes I'm seeing: one when (failing to) allocate
>> the first node's mem_map[], and a second where it oopses accessing the
>> numa_distance[] table. This is the numa_distance[] one, and it happens
>> even with the patch you suggested applied.
>>
>>> [ 0.000000] memblock_find_in_range_node():239
>>> [ 0.000000] __memblock_find_range_top_down():150
>>> [ 0.000000] __memblock_find_range_top_down():152 i: 600000001
>>> [ 0.000000] memblock_find_in_range_node():241 ret: 2147479552
>>> [ 0.000000] memblock_reserve: [0x0000007ffff000-0x0000007ffff03f] flags
>>> 0x0 numa_set_distance+0xd2/0x252
>
> that address is wrong.
>
> Can you post whole log with current linus' tree + two patches that I
> sent out yesterday?
Here you go. It's still spitting out memblock_reserve messages to the
console. I'm not sure if it's making _some_ progress or not.
https://www.sr71.net/~dave/intel/3.13/dmesg.with-2-patches
But, it's certainly not booting. Do you want to see it without
memblock=debug?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
