Christoph Lameter wrote:
On Mon, 19 Nov 2007, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
You're making the assumption here that NUMA = large number of CPUs. This
assumption is flat-out wrong.
Well maybe. Usually one gets to NUMA because the hardware gets too big to
be handleed the UMA way.
On x86-64, most two-socket systems are still NUMA, and I would expect that
most distro kernels probably compile in NUMA. However,
burning megabytes of memory on a two-socket dual-core system when we're
talking about tens of kilobytes used would be more than a wee bit insane.
Yeah yea but the latencies are minimal making the NUMA logic too expensive
for most loads ... If you put a NUMA kernel onto those then performance
drops (I think someone measures 15-30%?)
How do you handle this memory, in the first place? Do you allocate the
whole 2 MB for the particular CPU, or do you reclaim the upper part of
the large page? (I haven't dug far enough into the source to tell.)
-hpa
-
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]
