From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2007 01:20:36 -0500 From: Matt Mackall Subject: Re: [PATCH] slob: poor man's NUMA support. Message-ID: <20070625062036.GJ11115@waste.org> References: <20070619090616.GA23697@linux-sh.org> <467F5E14.5030401@yahoo.com.au> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <467F5E14.5030401@yahoo.com.au> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Nick Piggin Cc: Paul Mundt , Andrew Morton , Christoph Lameter , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Mon, Jun 25, 2007 at 04:17:56PM +1000, Nick Piggin wrote: > Paul Mundt wrote: > >This adds preliminary NUMA support to SLOB, primarily aimed at systems > >with small nodes (tested all the way down to a 128kB SRAM block), whether > >asymmetric or otherwise. > > Fine by me as well, FWIW. My points about per-cpu/node queues were not > to say that I'm really opposed to getting this in first. In a way, you > sell yourself short with the patch name: the implementation may be just > a basic one, but simplicity is a key point of SLOB... Adding numa > awareness to the slob APIs is obviously a key step and makes it much > easier to experiment with enhancements to the implementation. > > Unless it has been picked up already, I'd call it "initial NUMA support" > ;) Thanks! Would be great to hear about your experiences using SLOB as > well -- how much memory you're saving, how it performs, etc. I haven't seen the usual echo from Andrew, so I think Paul should resend it with three Acked-bys. -- Mathematics is the supreme nostalgia of our time. -- 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