Re: [Xen-devel] numa=on broken

To:	Ryan Harper <ryanh@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject:	Re: [Xen-devel] numa=on broken
From:	Keir Fraser <Keir.Fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date:	Fri, 30 Mar 2007 19:51:27 +0100
Cc:	xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Delivery-date:	Fri, 30 Mar 2007 19:52:09 +0100
Envelope-to:	Keir.Fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to:	<20070330184620.GV28736@xxxxxxxxxx>
List-help:	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-id:	Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>
List-post:	<mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-subscribe:	<http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe:	<http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
Sender:	xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Thread-index:	Acdy/GvYqqjQTt7vEdusYQAWy6hiGQ==
Thread-topic:	[Xen-devel] numa=on broken
User-agent:	Microsoft-Entourage/11.3.3.061214

On 30/3/07 19:46, "Ryan Harper" <ryanh@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> That is, we are still dying in init_heap_pages(), but this time for
> allocating avail[0] rather than avail[1].

In addition to that change in x86/setup.c, move the first three lines of
code from end_boot_allocator() into init_xenheap_pages() (these are the ones
that actually set up the statically allocated node0 metadata). If that works
I'll sort out a clean fix.

This is just a simple exercise in code shuffling. :-)

 -- Keir

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel