From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2006 00:44:02 -0700 From: Paul Jackson Subject: Re: [PATCH] GFP_THISNODE for the slab allocator Message-Id: <20060915004402.88d462ff.pj@sgi.com> In-Reply-To: <20060915002325.bffe27d1.akpm@osdl.org> References: <20060914220011.2be9100a.akpm@osdl.org> <20060914234926.9b58fd77.pj@sgi.com> <20060915002325.bffe27d1.akpm@osdl.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Andrew Morton Cc: clameter@sgi.com, linux-mm@kvack.org, rientjes@google.com List-ID: Andrew wrote: > Well some bright spark went and had the idea of using cpusets and fake numa > nodes as a means of memory paritioning, didn't he? If that bright spark is lurking here, perhaps he could educate me a little. I mostly ignored the fake numa node stuff when it went by, because I figured it was just an amusing novelty. Perhaps its time I learned why it is valuable. Can someone explain it to me, and describe a bit the situations in which it is useful. Seems like NUMA mechanisms are being (ab)used for micro-partitioning memory. As Andrew speculates, this could lead to reconsidering and fancifying up some of the mechanisms, to cover a wider range of situations efficiently. Thanks. -- I won't rest till it's the best ... Programmer, Linux Scalability Paul Jackson 1.925.600.0401 -- 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