Andi Kleen wrote: > On Monday 02 April 2007 23:56:08 Dave Hansen wrote: >> On Mon, 2007-04-02 at 14:28 -0700, Christoph Lameter wrote: >>> 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). >> I honestly don't doubt that there are regressions, somewhere. Could you >> elaborate, and perhaps actually show us some numbers on this? Perhaps >> instead of adding a completely new model, we can adapt the existing ones >> somehow. > > If it works I would be inclined to replaced old sparsemem with Christoph's > new one on x86-64. Perhaps that could cut down the bewildering sparsemem > ifdef jungle that is there currently. > > But I presume it won't work on 32bit because of the limited address space?
Right. But we might be able to do switch SPARSEMEM_EXTREME users here if performance is better and no other regressions are detected. There seems to be a theme, we need to get some numbers. I will try and get what I can with the hardware I have and see whats missing. > >> But, without some cold, hard, data, we mere mortals without the 1024-way >> machines can only guess. ;) -apw - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/