On Fri, 24 Jan 2014, Mel Gorman wrote:
That'd be okish for 64-bit at least although it would show up as
degraded performance in some cases when virtually contiguous buffers were
used. Aside from the higher setup, access costs and teardown costs of a
virtual contiguous buffer, the underlying
On Wed, 22 Jan 2014, Mel Gorman wrote:
Don't get me wrong, I'm interested in the topic but I severely doubt I'd
have the capacity to research the background of this in advance. It's also
unlikely that I'd work on it in the future without throwing out my current
TODO list. In an ideal world
On Wed, 22 Jan 2014, Mel Gorman wrote:
Large block support was proposed years ago by Christoph Lameter
(http://lwn.net/Articles/232757/). I think I was just getting started
in the community at the time so I do not recall any of the details. I do
believe it motivated an alternative by Nick
On Thu, 23 Jan 2014, James Bottomley wrote:
If the compound page infrastructure exists today and is usable for this,
what else do we need to do? ... because if it's a couple of trivial
changes and a few minor patches to filesystems to take advantage of it,
we might as well do it anyway. I
On Fri, 6 Jul 2012, James Bottomley wrote:
What people might pay attention to is evidence that there's a problem in
3.5-rc6 (without any OFED crap). If you're not going to bother
investigating, it has to be in an environment they can reproduce (so
ordinary hardware, not infiniband) otherwise
On Thu, 24 May 2007, Salyzyn, Mark wrote:
So, is the sequence:
p = kmalloc(upsg-sg[i].count,GFP_KERNEL);
. . .
addr = pci_map_single(dev-pdev, p, upsg-sg[i].count,
data_dir);
Going to ensure that we have a 31 bit (not 32 bit) physical address?
Only if you have less
On Thu, 24 May 2007, James Bottomley wrote:
Going to ensure that we have a 31 bit (not 32 bit) physical address?
No, unfortunately. Implementing kmalloc_mask() and kmalloc_dev() was
something I said I'd do ... about two years ago.
Tell me more about these ideas.
-
To unsubscribe from
On Thu, 24 May 2007, James Bottomley wrote:
The idea was basically to match an allocation to a device mask. I was
going to do a generic implementation (which would probably kmalloc,
check the physaddr and fall back to GFP_DMA if we were unlucky) but
allow the architectures to override.
GFP_DMAs left in the scsi
layer?
Acked-by: Christoph Lameter [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-scsi in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
9 matches
Mail list logo
