[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <47BE7463.9040706@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2008 12:36:11 +0530
From: Balbir Singh <balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>
CC: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@...oo.com.au>, akpm@...l.org,
torvalds@...l.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Document huge memory/cache overhead of memory controller
in Kconfig
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote:
> On Thu, 21 Feb 2008 16:33:33 +0530
> Balbir Singh <balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
>
>>> Another issue is that it will slightly increase TLB/cache
>>> cost of the memory controller, but I think that would be a fair
>>> trade off for it being zero cost when disabled but compiled
>>> in.
>>>
>>> Doing it with vmalloc should be easy enough. I can do such
>>> a patch later unless someone beats me to it...
>>>
>> I'll get to it, but I have too many things on my plate at the moment. KAMEZAWA
>> also wanted to look at it. I looked through some vmalloc() internals yesterday
>> and I am worried about allocating all the memory on a single node in a NUMA
>> system and changing VMALLOC_XXXX on every architecture to provide more vmalloc
>> space. I might be missing something obvious.
>>
>
> I'll post a series of patch to do that later (it's under debug now...)
> I'm glad if people (including you) look it and give me advices.
>
Thank you so much for your help. I'll definitely look at it and review/test them.
--
Warm Regards,
Balbir Singh
Linux Technology Center
IBM, ISTL
--
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