Re: [Lse-tech] Re: idle task's task_t allocation on NUMA machines

--On Thursday, August 18, 2005 22:02:55 +0200 Samuel Thibault <[email protected]> wrote:

> Samuel Thibault, le Thu 18 Aug 2005 21:49:41 +0200, a écrit :
>> Eric Dumazet, le Thu 18 Aug 2005 17:18:55 +0200, a écrit :
>> > I believe IRQ stacks are also allocated on node 0, that seems more serious.
>> 
>> For the i386 architecture at least, yes: they are statically defined in
>> arch/i386/kernel/irq.c, while they could be per_cpu.
> 
> Hum, but the per_cpu areas for i386 are not numa-aware... I'm wondering:
> isn't the current x86_64 numa-aware implementation of per_cpu generic
> enough for any architecture?

All ZONE_NORMAL on ia32 is on node 0, so I don't think it'll help.

M.

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

---

• References:
  • idle task's task_t allocation on NUMA machines
    • From: Samuel Thibault <[email protected]>
  • Re: idle task's task_t allocation on NUMA machines
    • From: Eric Dumazet <[email protected]>
  • Re: idle task's task_t allocation on NUMA machines
    • From: Samuel Thibault <[email protected]>
  • Re: idle task's task_t allocation on NUMA machines
    • From: Samuel Thibault <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH 1/3] dlm: use configfs
• Next by Date: Re: Multiple virtual address mapping for the same code on IA-64 linux kernel.
• Previous by thread: Re: idle task's task_t allocation on NUMA machines
• Next by thread: Re: [Lse-tech] Re: idle task's task_t allocation on NUMA machines
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]