From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 09:20:46 +0100 Subject: Re: NUMA policy issues with ZONE_MOVABLE Message-ID: <20070727082046.GA6301@skynet.ie> References: <20070725111646.GA9098@skynet.ie> <20070726132336.GA18825@skynet.ie> <20070726225920.GA10225@skynet.ie> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: From: mel@skynet.ie (Mel Gorman) Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Christoph Lameter Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, Lee Schermerhorn , ak@suse.de, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki , akpm@linux-foundation.org, pj@sgi.com List-ID: On (26/07/07 18:22), Christoph Lameter didst pronounce: > On Thu, 26 Jul 2007, Mel Gorman wrote: > > > Comments? > > Lets go with the unconditional filtering and get rid of some of the per > node zonelists? I would prefer to go with this for 2.6.23 and work on that for 2.6.24. The patch should be relatively straight-forward (I'll work on it today) but it would need wider testing than what I can do here, particularly on the larger machines that needed things like zlcache. > We could f.e. merge the lists for ZONE_MOVABLE and > ZONE_base_of_zone_movable? That will be fine for freelist management but a mess with respect to reclaim. I'd rather not go down that rathole. > That may increase the cacheability of the > zonelists and reduce cache footprint. That should be the case. I'll work on the patch today and see what sort of results I get. -- Mel Gorman Part-time Phd Student Linux Technology Center University of Limerick IBM Dublin Software Lab -- 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