On Tue, Feb 15, 2005 at 12:03:22PM -0800, David Mosberger wrote: > >>>>> On Tue, 15 Feb 2005 13:59:45 -0600, Robin Holt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > > >> I certainly don't want to switch my machines to 4-levels. There > >> is zero need for that on the machines I use, so why pay the > >> overhead of an extra level? > > Robin> I missed the why the extra level question. That part is > Robin> motivated by some large MPI jobs need a fourth level to get a > Robin> large enough single mapping to cover their entire dataset. > Robin> We have already tripped this limitation for a couple of our > Robin> really large customers. > > What I'm saying is that the default probably should stay at 3-levels. > Optimizing ia64 linux _just_ for "really large customers" would be > a bad direction to go in.
I agree. What I am asking is if we turn on the 4th level of page tables, does anybody have an objection to 4/16k levels as opposed to 3/PAGE_SIZE plus a 4th cleanup to cover the entire address space? Thanks, Robin - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ia64" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
