[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0612050803000.11213@schroedinger.engr.sgi.com>
Date: Tue, 5 Dec 2006 08:05:16 -0800 (PST)
From: Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com>
To: Mel Gorman <mel@....ul.ie>
cc: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>, akpm@...l.org,
apw@...dowen.org, linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add __GFP_MOVABLE for callers to flag allocations that
may be migrated
On Tue, 5 Dec 2006, Mel Gorman wrote:
> That is one possibility. There are people working on fake nodes for containers
> at the moment. If that pans out, the infrastructure would be available to
> create one node per DIMM.
Right that is a hack in use for one project. We would be adding huge
amounts of VM overhead if we do a node per DIMM.
So a desktop system with two dimms is to be treated like a NUMA
system? Or how else do we deal with the multitude of load balancing
situations that the additional nodes will generate?
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists