From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <46A6DE75.70803@yahoo.com.au> Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 15:24:05 +1000 From: Nick Piggin MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: NUMA policy issues with ZONE_MOVABLE References: <46A6D5E1.70407@yahoo.com.au> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Christoph Lameter Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, Lee Schermerhorn , ak@suse.de, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki , Mel Gorman , akpm@linux-foundation.org List-ID: Christoph Lameter wrote: > On Wed, 25 Jul 2007, Nick Piggin wrote: > > >>>Doesnt this mean that ZONE_MOVABLE is incompatible with CONFIG_NUMA? >> >>I guess it has similar problems as ZONE_HIGHMEM etc. I think the >>zoned allocator and NUMA was there first, so it might be more >>correct to say that mempolicies are incompatible with them :) > > > Highmem is only used on i386 NUMA and works fine on NUMAQ. The current > zone types are carefully fitted to existing NUMA systems. I don't understand what you mean. Aren't mempolicies also supposed to work on NUMAQ too? How about DMA and DMA32 allocations? >>But I thought you had plans to fix mempolicies to do zones better? > > > No sure where you got that from. I repeatedly suggested that more zones be > removed because of this one and other issues. Oh I must have been mistaken. Well I guess you haven't succeeded in getting zones removed, so I think we should make mempolicies work better with zones. -- SUSE Labs, Novell Inc. -- 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