From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from psmtp.com (na3sys010amx116.postini.com [74.125.245.116]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 42B706B13F2 for ; Wed, 1 Feb 2012 17:44:03 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2012 14:44:01 -0800 From: Andrew Morton Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/5] mm: search from free_area_cache for the bigger size Message-Id: <20120201144401.af84e3a2.akpm@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: <4F1019D3.8020709@linux.vnet.ibm.com> References: <4F101904.8090405@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <4F1019D3.8020709@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Xiao Guangrong Cc: William Irwin , linux-mm@kvack.org, LKML On Fri, 13 Jan 2012 19:47:31 +0800 Xiao Guangrong wrote: > If the required size is bigger than cached_hole_size, we would better search > from free_area_cache, it is more easier to get free region, specifically for > the 64 bit process whose address space is large enough > > Do it just as hugetlb_get_unmapped_area_topdown() in arch/x86/mm/hugetlbpage.c Can this cause additional fragmentation of the virtual address region? If so, what might be the implications of this? -- 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/ . Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/ Don't email: email@kvack.org