From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andi Kleen Subject: Re: NUMA policy issues with ZONE_MOVABLE Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 11:32:54 +0200 References: <46A6DE75.70803@yahoo.com.au> In-Reply-To: <46A6DE75.70803@yahoo.com.au> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200707251132.54572.ak@suse.de> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Nick Piggin Cc: Christoph Lameter , linux-mm@kvack.org, Lee Schermerhorn , KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki , Mel Gorman , akpm@linux-foundation.org List-ID: On Wednesday 25 July 2007 07:24:05 Nick Piggin wrote: > I don't understand what you mean. Aren't mempolicies also supposed to > work on NUMAQ too? How about DMA and DMA32 allocations? bind mempolicies only support one zone, always the highest. This means on numaq only highmem is policied. DMA/DMA32 is not policied for obvious reasons (they often don't exist on all nodes) > Well I guess you haven't succeeded in getting zones removed, so I think > we should make mempolicies work better with zones. Why? That would just complicate everything. In particular it would mean you would need multiple fallback lists per VMA, which would increase the memory usage significantly. -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: email@kvack.org