On Sun, Mar 9, 2014 at 12:06 AM, Muli Ben-Yehuda wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 06, 2014 at 07:46:44AM -0700, Jon Mason wrote:
>
>> > I don't know of anyone still using it, but it's not
>> > impossible. Calgary and CalIOC2 machines would now be ~5-8 years
>> > old.
>>
>> It is getting a bit crufty in
On Sun, Mar 9, 2014 at 12:06 AM, Muli Ben-Yehuda m...@cs.technion.ac.il wrote:
On Thu, Mar 06, 2014 at 07:46:44AM -0700, Jon Mason wrote:
I don't know of anyone still using it, but it's not
impossible. Calgary and CalIOC2 machines would now be ~5-8 years
old.
It is getting a bit crufty
On Thu, Mar 06, 2014 at 07:46:44AM -0700, Jon Mason wrote:
> > I don't know of anyone still using it, but it's not
> > impossible. Calgary and CalIOC2 machines would now be ~5-8 years
> > old.
>
> It is getting a bit crufty in arch/x86. Would it be better to move
> it to drivers/iommu?
Not
On Thu, Mar 06, 2014 at 07:46:44AM -0700, Jon Mason wrote:
I don't know of anyone still using it, but it's not
impossible. Calgary and CalIOC2 machines would now be ~5-8 years
old.
It is getting a bit crufty in arch/x86. Would it be better to move
it to drivers/iommu?
Not sure I see
On Thu, Mar 06, 2014 at 08:47:56AM +0200, Muli Ben-Yehuda wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 05, 2014 at 01:36:17PM +0800, WANG Chao wrote:
>
> > Hi, Muli
> >
> > saved_max_pfn is becoming a setback for kexec-tools. Ideally calgary
> > could get rid of saved_max_pfn at all. But If this can't work, how
> >
On Thu, Mar 6, 2014 at 12:00 AM, Muli Ben-Yehuda wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 05, 2014 at 10:50:41PM -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>
>> OK, second question... is it time to axe Calgary?
>
> I don't know of anyone still using it, but it's not
> impossible. Calgary and CalIOC2 machines would now be ~5-8
On Thu, Mar 6, 2014 at 12:00 AM, Muli Ben-Yehuda m...@cs.technion.ac.il wrote:
On Wed, Mar 05, 2014 at 10:50:41PM -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
OK, second question... is it time to axe Calgary?
I don't know of anyone still using it, but it's not
impossible. Calgary and CalIOC2 machines would
On Thu, Mar 06, 2014 at 08:47:56AM +0200, Muli Ben-Yehuda wrote:
On Wed, Mar 05, 2014 at 01:36:17PM +0800, WANG Chao wrote:
Hi, Muli
saved_max_pfn is becoming a setback for kexec-tools. Ideally calgary
could get rid of saved_max_pfn at all. But If this can't work, how
about exporting
On Wed, Mar 05, 2014 at 10:50:41PM -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> OK, second question... is it time to axe Calgary?
I don't know of anyone still using it, but it's not
impossible. Calgary and CalIOC2 machines would now be ~5-8 years old.
Cheers,
Muli
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the
On 03/05/2014 10:47 PM, Muli Ben-Yehuda wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 05, 2014 at 01:36:17PM +0800, WANG Chao wrote:
>
>> Hi, Muli
>>
>> saved_max_pfn is becoming a setback for kexec-tools. Ideally calgary
>> could get rid of saved_max_pfn at all. But If this can't work, how
>> about exporting a calgary
On Wed, Mar 05, 2014 at 01:36:17PM +0800, WANG Chao wrote:
> Hi, Muli
>
> saved_max_pfn is becoming a setback for kexec-tools. Ideally calgary
> could get rid of saved_max_pfn at all. But If this can't work, how
> about exporting a calgary tce table size to user space, so that
> kexec-tools can
On Wed, Mar 05, 2014 at 01:36:17PM +0800, WANG Chao wrote:
Hi, Muli
saved_max_pfn is becoming a setback for kexec-tools. Ideally calgary
could get rid of saved_max_pfn at all. But If this can't work, how
about exporting a calgary tce table size to user space, so that
kexec-tools can simply
On 03/05/2014 10:47 PM, Muli Ben-Yehuda wrote:
On Wed, Mar 05, 2014 at 01:36:17PM +0800, WANG Chao wrote:
Hi, Muli
saved_max_pfn is becoming a setback for kexec-tools. Ideally calgary
could get rid of saved_max_pfn at all. But If this can't work, how
about exporting a calgary tce table
On Wed, Mar 05, 2014 at 10:50:41PM -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
OK, second question... is it time to axe Calgary?
I don't know of anyone still using it, but it's not
impossible. Calgary and CalIOC2 machines would now be ~5-8 years old.
Cheers,
Muli
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the
[ Add Muli, I find his new email in git log]
Hi, Muli
saved_max_pfn is becoming a setback for kexec-tools. Ideally calgary
could get rid of saved_max_pfn at all. But If this can't work, how about
exporting a calgary tce table size to user space, so that kexec-tools
can simply pass calgary=xxx
[ Add Muli, I find his new email in git log]
Hi, Muli
saved_max_pfn is becoming a setback for kexec-tools. Ideally calgary
could get rid of saved_max_pfn at all. But If this can't work, how about
exporting a calgary tce table size to user space, so that kexec-tools
can simply pass calgary=xxx
On 02/19/14 at 05:04pm, Jon Mason wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 11:18 PM, WANG Chao wrote:
> > Hi, All
> >
> > arch/x86/kernel/pci-calgary.c is the only user of saved_max_pfn today:
> >
> > int __init detect_calgary(void)
> > {
> > [..]
> > specified_table_size =
On 02/19/14 at 05:04pm, Jon Mason wrote:
On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 11:18 PM, WANG Chao chaow...@redhat.com wrote:
Hi, All
arch/x86/kernel/pci-calgary.c is the only user of saved_max_pfn today:
int __init detect_calgary(void)
{
[..]
specified_table_size =
Remove m...@il.ibm.com from CC, this email isn't valid now.
On 02/19/14 at 09:36pm, Vivek Goyal wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 05:04:22PM -0700, Jon Mason wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 11:18 PM, WANG Chao wrote:
> > > Hi, All
> > >
> > > arch/x86/kernel/pci-calgary.c is the only user of
Remove m...@il.ibm.com from CC, this email isn't valid now.
On 02/19/14 at 09:36pm, Vivek Goyal wrote:
On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 05:04:22PM -0700, Jon Mason wrote:
On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 11:18 PM, WANG Chao chaow...@redhat.com wrote:
Hi, All
arch/x86/kernel/pci-calgary.c is the only
On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 05:04:22PM -0700, Jon Mason wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 11:18 PM, WANG Chao wrote:
> > Hi, All
> >
> > arch/x86/kernel/pci-calgary.c is the only user of saved_max_pfn today:
> >
> > int __init detect_calgary(void)
> > {
> > [..]
> >
On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 11:18 PM, WANG Chao wrote:
> Hi, All
>
> arch/x86/kernel/pci-calgary.c is the only user of saved_max_pfn today:
>
> int __init detect_calgary(void)
> {
> [..]
> specified_table_size = determine_tce_table_size((is_kdump_kernel() ?
>
On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 11:18 PM, WANG Chao chaow...@redhat.com wrote:
Hi, All
arch/x86/kernel/pci-calgary.c is the only user of saved_max_pfn today:
int __init detect_calgary(void)
{
[..]
specified_table_size = determine_tce_table_size((is_kdump_kernel() ?
On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 05:04:22PM -0700, Jon Mason wrote:
On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 11:18 PM, WANG Chao chaow...@redhat.com wrote:
Hi, All
arch/x86/kernel/pci-calgary.c is the only user of saved_max_pfn today:
int __init detect_calgary(void)
{
[..]
Hi, All
arch/x86/kernel/pci-calgary.c is the only user of saved_max_pfn today:
int __init detect_calgary(void)
{
[..]
specified_table_size = determine_tce_table_size((is_kdump_kernel() ?
saved_max_pfn : max_pfn) * PAGE_SIZE);
[..]
}
Hi, All
arch/x86/kernel/pci-calgary.c is the only user of saved_max_pfn today:
int __init detect_calgary(void)
{
[..]
specified_table_size = determine_tce_table_size((is_kdump_kernel() ?
saved_max_pfn : max_pfn) * PAGE_SIZE);
[..]
}
26 matches
Mail list logo
