crash in kmem_cache_init

[Christoph Lameter]

On Tue, 22 Jan 2008, Mel Gorman wrote:

> Rather it should be 2. I'll admit the physical setup of this machine is
> .... less than ideal but clearly it's something that can happen even if
> it's a bad idea.

Ok. Lets hope that Pekka's find does the trick. But this would mean that 
fallback gets memory from node 2 for the page allocator. Then fallback 
alloc is going to try to insert it into the l3 of node 2 which is not 
there yet. So another ooops. Sigh.