From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Wed, 02 Nov 2005 06:51:37 -0800 From: "Martin J. Bligh" Reply-To: "Martin J. Bligh" Subject: Re: [Lhms-devel] [PATCH 0/7] Fragmentation Avoidance V19 Message-ID: <253150000.1130943095@[10.10.2.4]> In-Reply-To: <43687C3D.7060706@yahoo.com.au> References: <1130917338.14475.133.camel@localhost> <436877DB.7020808@yahoo.com.au> <20051102172729.9E7C.Y-GOTO@jp.fujitsu.com> <43687C3D.7060706@yahoo.com.au> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Nick Piggin , Yasunori Goto Cc: Dave Hansen , Ingo Molnar , Mel Gorman , Andrew Morton , kravetz@us.ibm.com, linux-mm , Linux Kernel Mailing List , lhms List-ID: > Well I think it can satisfy hugepage allocations simply because > we can be reasonably sure of being able to free contiguous regions. > Of course it will be memory no longer easily reclaimable, same as > the case for the frag patches. Nor would be name ZONE_REMOVABLE any > longer be the most appropriate! > > But my point is, the basic mechanism is there and is workable. > Hugepages and memory unplug are the two main reasons for IBM to be > pushing this AFAIKS. No, that's not true - those are just the "exciting" features that go on the back of it. Look back in this email thread - there's lots of other reasons to fix fragmentation. I don't believe you can eliminate all the order > 0 allocations in the kernel. -- 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