On Mon, 4 Dec 2006, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > The multi zone approach does not work with NUMA. NUMA only supports a
> > single zone for memory policy control etc.
>
> Wot? memory policies are a per-vma thing?
They only apply to "policy_zone" of a node. policy_zone can only take a
single type of zone (has been like it forever). Multiple zones could
become a nightmare with an exploding number of zones on zonelists. I.e.
instead of 1k zones on a nodelist we now have 2k for two or even 4k if you
want to have support for memory policies for 4 zones per node. We will
then increase the search time through zonelists and have to manage all the
memory in the different zones. Balancing is going to be difficult.
> I suspect you'll have to live with that. I've yet to see a vaguely sane
> proposal to otherwise prevent unreclaimable, unmoveable kernel allocations
> from landing in a hot-unpluggable physical memory region.
Mel's approach already mananges memory in a chunks of MAX_ORDER. It is
easy to just restrict the unmovable types of allocation to a section of
the zone.
Then we should be doing some work to cut down the number of unmovable
allocations.
-
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/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
