From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 20:13:48 +0100 From: Andi Kleen Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] NUMA boot hash allocation interleaving Message-ID: <20041214191348.GA27225@wotan.suse.de> References: <9250000.1103050790@flay> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <9250000.1103050790@flay> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: "Martin J. Bligh" Cc: Brent Casavant , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org, ak@suse.de List-ID: On Tue, Dec 14, 2004 at 10:59:50AM -0800, Martin J. Bligh wrote: > > NUMA systems running current Linux kernels suffer from substantial > > inequities in the amount of memory allocated from each NUMA node > > during boot. In particular, several large hashes are allocated > > using alloc_bootmem, and as such are allocated contiguously from > > a single node each. > > Yup, makes a lot of sense to me to stripe these, for the caches that I originally was a bit worried about the TLB usage, but it doesn't seem to be a too big issue (hopefully the benchmarks weren't too micro though) > didn't Manfred or someone (Andi?) do this before? Or did that never > get accepted? I know we talked about it a while back. I talked about it, but never implemented it. I am not aware of any other implementation of this before Brent's. -Andi -- 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: aart@kvack.org