On Monday 29 October 2007 20:43:11 Dave Jones wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 29, 2007 at 08:03:09PM +0100, Andi Kleen wrote:
>
> > > > It's probably the usual "nobody tests sparsemem at all" issue.
> > >
> > > We've been using SPARSEMEM in Fedora for a *long* time.
> > > So long in fact, I forget why we moved away from DISCONTIGMEM, so there's
> > > a significant number of users using that configuration for some time.
> >
> > Supposedly you wanted a slower kernel that needs more memory?
> >
> > Ok I wasn't aware of that. I tended to get sparsemem reports usually
> > at least 1-2 releases after the fact, so it looked like it was undertested.
>
> Looking at cvs history, I can't figure out what the reasoning was,
> but every Fedora (and RHEL5) kernel since 2006/07/05 has been that way.
>
> Curious how no-one noticed either of the side-effects you mention.
It's a few percent on a few benchmarks iirc. vmemmap (now in .24) was supposed
to address that.
-Andi
-
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]
