On 1 Jun 2004, Eric W. Biederman wrote: > ron minnich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > just FYI, making BARS live above the 32-bit limit will break every single > > linux cluster here at LANL, and will also disable Plan 9. > > Only for the hardware where the BARs move.
guess I missed something in your writeup. Are you saying that moving all BARs above 2^32 won't cause trouble for a 32-bit mode linux or freebsd or plan 9 or ... > > With BARS under the 32-bit limit, you can boot anything. With BARS above > > that limit, you immediately limit what you can boot. > > Yes. And largely I see that as a good thing. But do the potential users of linuxbios systems that as a good thing? I understand the motivation, but sometimes customers (including us) do silly things, such as run K8s in 32-bit mode (it's actually a good thing as a K8 is a better Xeon than a Xeon, at least for our programs). As long as it is an option I don't mind however. > > In principle, I like your BAR fix, but setting up BARS that are optimized > > for 64-bit kernels should be a (normally disabled) option. > > For old clusters I agree that it should be normally disabled. for our new cluster (Lightning) first boot is into 32-bit linux for now, and will likely stay that way for a while as that system runs as 32-bits (not my decision ...) This change can hurt new clusters. ron _______________________________________________ Linuxbios mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.clustermatic.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
