On 28.05.2014 [09:56:14 +1000], Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > On Tue, 2014-05-27 at 16:44 -0700, Nishanth Aravamudan wrote: > > > Signed-off-by: Nishanth Aravamudan <n...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> > > > > Ping on this and patch 2/2. Ben, would you be willing to pull these > > into > > your -next branch so they'd get some testing? > > > > http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/350368/ > > http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/349838/ > > > > Without any further changes, these two help quite a bit with the slab > > consumption on CONFIG_SLUB kernels when memoryless nodes are present. > > I don't mind at all :-) I haven't really been following that story > so I was waiting for the dust to settle and maybe acks from MM people > but if you tell me they are good I'm prepared to trust you.
The patches themselves are pretty minimal and similar to the ia64 changes (and the affected code seems like it hasn't changed in some time, beyond in the common code). I'd mostly like to get some broad-range build & boot testing. Also, is NUMA a sufficient symbol to depend, you think? I figure most of the PPC NUMA systems are the pSeries/IBM variety, which is where I've run into memoryless nodes in the first place. Thanks, Nish _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
