Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.kernel > #1262092 > unrolled thread

Re: [PATCH] mm: Introduce kernelcore=reliable option

Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: [PATCH] mm: Introduce kernelcore=reliable option Kamezawa Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> - 2015-11-04 08:00 +0100

#1262092 — Re: [PATCH] mm: Introduce kernelcore=reliable option

On 2015/10/31 4:42, Luck, Tony wrote:
>> If each memory controller has the same distance/latency, you (your firmware) don't need
>> to allocate reliable memory per each memory controller.
>> If distance is problem, another node should be allocated.
>>
>> ...is the behavior(splitting zone) really required ?
>
> It's useful from a memory bandwidth perspective to have allocations
> spread across both memory controllers. Keeping a whole bunch of
> Xeon cores fed needs all the bandwidth you can get.
>

Hmm. But physical address layout is not related to dual memory controller.
I think reliable range can be contiguous by firmware...

-Kame


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

[toc] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel

csiph-web