From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 17:22:42 +0900 From: KUROSAWA Takahiro Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] Add the pzone In-Reply-To: <43D08C6C.1000802@jp.fujitsu.com> References: <20060119080408.24736.13148.sendpatchset@debian> <20060119080413.24736.27946.sendpatchset@debian> <43D08C6C.1000802@jp.fujitsu.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <20060120082242.8BEE57402D@sv1.valinux.co.jp> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki Cc: ckrm-tech@lists.sourceforge.net, linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: On Fri, 20 Jan 2006 16:08:28 +0900 KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote: > > include/linux/gfp.h | 3 > > include/linux/mm.h | 49 ++ > > include/linux/mmzone.h | 118 ++++++ > > include/linux/swap.h | 2 > > mm/Kconfig | 6 > > mm/page_alloc.c | 845 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---- > > mm/shmem.c | 2 > > mm/vmscan.c | 75 +++- > > 8 files changed, 1020 insertions(+), 80 deletions(-) > Could you divide this *large* patch to several pieces ? Ok, I'll split the patch. > It looks you don't want to use functions based on zones, buddy-system, lru-list etc.. > I think what you want is just a hierarchical memory allocator. > Why do you modify zone and make codes complicated ? > Can your memory allocater be implimented like mempool or hugetlb ? > They are not so invasive. mempool and hugetlb require their own shrinking code, don't they? I guess that we would need the routines like mm/vmscan.c if we are going to shrink user pages. Instead, I'd like to reuse the shrinking code in mm/vmscan.c. Thanks, -- KUROSAWA, Takahiro -- 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: email@kvack.org