[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <46117916.2040601@google.com>
Date: Mon, 02 Apr 2007 14:43:50 -0700
From: Martin Bligh <mbligh@...gle.com>
To: Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com>
CC: Dave Hansen <hansendc@...ibm.com>, Andi Kleen <ak@...e.de>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
linux-mm@...ck.org,
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>,
Andy Whitcroft <apw@...dowen.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] x86_64: Switch to SPARSE_VIRTUAL
> Note that these arguments on DISCONTIG are flame bait for many SGIers.
> We usually see this as an attack on DISCONTIG/VMEMMAP which is the
> existing best performing implementation for page_to_pfn and vice
> versa. Please lets stop the polarization. We want one consistent scheme
> to manage memory everywhere. I do not care what its called as long as it
> covers all the bases and is not a glaring performance regresssion (like
> SPARSEMEM so far).
The main conceptual difference (in my mind) was not having one
bastardized data structure (pg_data_t) that meant different
things in different situations (is it a node, or a section
of discontig mem?). Also we didn't support discontig mem within
a node (at least with the old discontigmem), which was partly
the result of that hybridization.
Beyond that, it's just naming really.
M.
-
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