Re: [patch 2/2] cpusets: add interleave_over_allowed option

[Lee Schermerhorn <Lee.Schermerhorn@hp.com>]

On Fri, 2007-10-26 at 14:17 -0700, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> On Fri, 26 Oct 2007, Lee Schermerhorn wrote:
> 
> > For some systems [not mine], the nodemasks can get quite large.  I have
> > a patch, that I've tested  atop Mel Gorman's "onezonelist" patches that
> > replaces the nodemasks embedded in struct mempolicy with pointers to
> > dynamically allocated ones.  However, it's probably not much of a win,
> > memorywise, if most of the uses are for interleave and bind
> > policies--both of which would always need the nodemasks in addition to
> > the pointers.
> > 
> > Now, if we could replace the 'cpuset_mems_allowed' nodemask with a
> > pointer to something stable, it might be a win.
> 
> The memory policies are already shared and have refcounters for that 
> purpose.

I must have missed that in the code I'm reading :)

Have a nice weekend.

Lee



-
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/