On Fri, 4 May 2007, Jesse Barnes wrote:
> You mentioned that if node 0 has a small ZONE_NORMAL and the ZONE_DMA for
> the system, defaulting to using ZONE_NORMAL on all nodes first would be a
> bad idea. Is that really true? Maybe for ZONE_DMA32 it is since that
> first node could have a few
On Friday, May 04, 2007, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> On Fri, 4 May 2007, Lee Schermerhorn wrote:
> > Hmmm... "serious hackery", indeed! ;-)
>
> Maybe on the arch level but minimal changes to core code.
> And it is a step towards avoiding zones in NUMA.
You mentioned that if node 0 has a small
On Fri, 4 May 2007, Lee Schermerhorn wrote:
> Hmmm... "serious hackery", indeed! ;-)
Maybe on the arch level but minimal changes to core code.
And it is a step towards avoiding zones in NUMA.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
On Fri, 2007-05-04 at 09:18 -0700, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> On Fri, 4 May 2007, Jesse Barnes wrote:
>
> > I think the idea is to avoid exhausting ZONE_DMA on some NUMA boxes by
> > ordering the fallback list first by zone, then by node distance (e.g.
> > ZONE_NORMAL of local node, then
On Thu, 2007-05-03 at 22:47 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Fri, 27 Apr 2007 14:45:30 +0900 KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
> > Hi, this is version 4. including Lee Schermerhon's good rework.
> > and automatic configuration at boot time.
>
> hm, this adds rather a lot of code.
On Fri, 4 May 2007, Jesse Barnes wrote:
> I think the idea is to avoid exhausting ZONE_DMA on some NUMA boxes by
> ordering the fallback list first by zone, then by node distance (e.g.
> ZONE_NORMAL of local node, then ZONE_NORMAL of next nearest node etc.,
> followed by ZONE_DMA of local
On Thursday, May 03, 2007, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Fri, 27 Apr 2007 14:45:30 +0900 KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Hi, this is version 4. including Lee Schermerhon's good rework.
> > and automatic configuration at boot time.
>
> hm, this adds rather a lot of code. Have we
On Thursday, May 03, 2007, Andrew Morton wrote:
On Fri, 27 Apr 2007 14:45:30 +0900 KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi, this is version 4. including Lee Schermerhon's good rework.
and automatic configuration at boot time.
hm, this adds rather a lot of code. Have we established
On Fri, 4 May 2007, Jesse Barnes wrote:
I think the idea is to avoid exhausting ZONE_DMA on some NUMA boxes by
ordering the fallback list first by zone, then by node distance (e.g.
ZONE_NORMAL of local node, then ZONE_NORMAL of next nearest node etc.,
followed by ZONE_DMA of local node,
On Thu, 2007-05-03 at 22:47 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
On Fri, 27 Apr 2007 14:45:30 +0900 KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Hi, this is version 4. including Lee Schermerhon's good rework.
and automatic configuration at boot time.
hm, this adds rather a lot of code. Have we
On Fri, 2007-05-04 at 09:18 -0700, Christoph Lameter wrote:
On Fri, 4 May 2007, Jesse Barnes wrote:
I think the idea is to avoid exhausting ZONE_DMA on some NUMA boxes by
ordering the fallback list first by zone, then by node distance (e.g.
ZONE_NORMAL of local node, then ZONE_NORMAL of
On Fri, 4 May 2007, Lee Schermerhorn wrote:
Hmmm... serious hackery, indeed! ;-)
Maybe on the arch level but minimal changes to core code.
And it is a step towards avoiding zones in NUMA.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in
the body of a message to
On Friday, May 04, 2007, Christoph Lameter wrote:
On Fri, 4 May 2007, Lee Schermerhorn wrote:
Hmmm... serious hackery, indeed! ;-)
Maybe on the arch level but minimal changes to core code.
And it is a step towards avoiding zones in NUMA.
You mentioned that if node 0 has a small
On Fri, 4 May 2007, Jesse Barnes wrote:
You mentioned that if node 0 has a small ZONE_NORMAL and the ZONE_DMA for
the system, defaulting to using ZONE_NORMAL on all nodes first would be a
bad idea. Is that really true? Maybe for ZONE_DMA32 it is since that
first node could have a few
On Fri, 27 Apr 2007 14:45:30 +0900 KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi, this is version 4. including Lee Schermerhon's good rework.
> and automatic configuration at boot time.
hm, this adds rather a lot of code. Have we established that it's worth
it?
And it's complex - how do
On Fri, 27 Apr 2007 14:45:30 +0900 KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi, this is version 4. including Lee Schermerhon's good rework.
and automatic configuration at boot time.
hm, this adds rather a lot of code. Have we established that it's worth
it?
And it's complex - how do poor
Hi, this is version 4. including Lee Schermerhon's good rework.
and automatic configuration at boot time.
(This patch is reworked from V2, so skip V3 changelog.)
ChangeLog V2 -> V4
- automatic configuration is added.
- automatic configuration is now default.
- relaxed_zone_order is renamed to be
Hi, this is version 4. including Lee Schermerhon's good rework.
and automatic configuration at boot time.
(This patch is reworked from V2, so skip V3 changelog.)
ChangeLog V2 - V4
- automatic configuration is added.
- automatic configuration is now default.
- relaxed_zone_order is renamed to be
18 matches
Mail list logo
