Re: NUMA policy interface

[Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de>]

On Thu, Aug 04, 2005 at 04:49:33PM -0700, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> On Fri, 5 Aug 2005, Andi Kleen wrote:
> 
> > None of them seem very attractive to me.  I would prefer to just
> > not support external accesses keeping things lean and fast.
> 
> That is a surprising statement given what we just discussed. Things 
> are not lean and fast but weirdly screwed up. The policy layer is 
> significantly impacted by historical contingencies rather than designed in 
> a clean way. It cannot even deliver the functionality it was designed to 
> deliver (see BIND).

That seems like a unfair description to me. While things are not
perfect they are definitely not as bad as you're trying to paint them.

> 
> > Individual physical page migration is quite different from
> > address space migration.
> 
> Address space migration? That is something new in this discussion. So 
> could you explain what you mean by that? I have looked at page migration 
> in a variety of contexts and could not see much difference.

MCE page migration just puts a physical page to somewhere else.
memory hotplug migration does the same for multiple pages from
different processes.

Page migration like you're asking for migrates whole processes.

-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: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>