[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <40982106-0eee-4e62-7ce0-c4787b0afac4@suse.cz>
Date: Fri, 6 Aug 2021 17:36:18 +0200
From: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>
To: Zi Yan <ziy@...dia.com>, David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>,
linux-mm@...ck.org
Cc: Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
"Kirill A . Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@...cle.com>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>,
John Hubbard <jhubbard@...dia.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Mike Rapoport <rppt@...ux.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 00/15] Make MAX_ORDER adjustable as a kernel boot time
parameter.
On 8/5/21 9:02 PM, Zi Yan wrote:
> From: Zi Yan <ziy@...dia.com>
> Patch 3 restores the pfn_valid_within() check when buddy allocator can merge
> pages across memory sections. The check was removed when ARM64 gets rid of holes
> in zones, but holes can appear in zones again after this patchset.
To me that's most unwelcome resurrection. I kinda missed it was going away and
now I can't even rejoice? I assume the systems that will be bumping max_order
have a lot of memory. Are they going to have many holes? What if we just
sacrificed the memory that would have a hole and don't add it to buddy at all?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists