[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170409014457.GA24681@WeideMBP.lan>
Date: Sun, 9 Apr 2017 09:44:57 +0800
From: Wei Yang <richard.weiyang@...il.com>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
Cc: Wei Yang <richard.weiyang@...il.com>, mgorman@...hsingularity.net,
jiang.liu@...ux.intel.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
tj@...nel.org, mingo@...nel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] calc_memmap_size() isn't accurate and one suggestion to
improve
On Mon, Apr 03, 2017 at 11:18:19AM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
>On Tue 28-03-17 09:11:37, Wei Yang wrote:
>> Hi, masters,
>>
>> # What I found
>>
>> I found the function calc_memmap_size() may not be that accurate to get the
>> pages for memmap.
>>
>> The reason is:
>>
>> > memmap is allocated on a node base,
>> > while the calculation is on a zone base
>>
>> This applies both to SPARSEMEM and FLATMEM.
>>
>> For example, on my laptop with 6G memory, all the memmap space is allocated
>> from ZONE_NORMAL.
>
>Please try to be more specific. Why is this a problem? Are you trying to
>fix some bad behavior or you want to make it more optimal?
>
>I am sorry I didn't look closer into your proposal but I am quite busy
>and other people are probably in a similar situation. If you want to get
>a proper feedback please try to state the problem and be explicit if it
>is user observable.
Michal
Glad to hear from you.
Sure, let me do more investigation on this and try some experiment to see
whether this change is observable.
Have a nice day~
>--
>Michal Hocko
>SUSE Labs
--
Wei Yang
Help you, Help me
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (820 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists