Re: [PATCH 0/3] NUMA boot hash allocation interleaving

["Martin J. Bligh" <mbligh@aracnet.com>]

>> Yup, makes a lot of sense to me to stripe these, for the caches that
>> are global (ie inodes, dentries, etc).  Only question I'd have is 
>> didn't Manfred or someone (Andi?) do this before? Or did that never
>> get accepted? I know we talked about it a while back.
> 
> Are you thinking of the 2006-06-05 patch from Andi about using
> the NUMA policy API for boot time allocation?
> 
> If so, that patch was accepted, but affects neither allocations
> performed via alloc_bootmem nor __get_free_pages, which are
> currently used to allocate these hashes.  vmalloc, however, does
> behave as desired with Andi's patch.

Nope, was for the hashes, but I think maybe it was all vapourware.
 
> Which is why vmalloc was chosen to solve this problem.  There were
> other more complicated possible solutions (e.g. multi-level hash tables,
> with the bottommost/largest level being allocated across all nodes),
> however those would have been so intrusive as to be unpalatable.
> So the vmalloc solution seemed reasonable, as long as it is used
> only on architectures with plentiful vmalloc space.

Yup, seems like a reasonable approach.

M.

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"aart@kvack.org"> aart@kvack.org </a>