From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wi0-f179.google.com (mail-wi0-f179.google.com [209.85.212.179]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1DEEF6B006E for ; Tue, 16 Jun 2015 05:46:24 -0400 (EDT) Received: by wicnd19 with SMTP id nd19so47953497wic.1 for ; Tue, 16 Jun 2015 02:46:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx2.suse.de (cantor2.suse.de. [195.135.220.15]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id ei6si2096707wib.57.2015.06.16.02.46.21 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Tue, 16 Jun 2015 02:46:22 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <557FF06A.3020000@suse.cz> Date: Tue, 16 Jun 2015 11:46:18 +0200 From: Vlastimil Babka MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 00/12] mm: mirrored memory support for page buddy allocations References: <55704A7E.5030507@huawei.com> <557FD5F8.10903@suse.cz> <557FDB9B.1090105@huawei.com> In-Reply-To: <557FDB9B.1090105@huawei.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Xishi Qiu Cc: Andrew Morton , nao.horiguchi@gmail.com, Yinghai Lu , "H. Peter Anvin" , Thomas Gleixner , mingo@elte.hu, Xiexiuqi , Hanjun Guo , "Luck, Tony" , Linux MM , LKML On 06/16/2015 10:17 AM, Xishi Qiu wrote: > On 2015/6/16 15:53, Vlastimil Babka wrote: > >> On 06/04/2015 02:54 PM, Xishi Qiu wrote: >>> >>> I think add a new migratetype is btter and easier than a new zone, so I use >> >> If the mirrored memory is in a single reasonably compact (no large holes) range >> (per NUMA node) and won't dynamically change its size, then zone might be a >> better option. For one thing, it will still allow distinguishing movable and >> unmovable allocations within the mirrored memory. >> >> We had enough fun with MIGRATE_CMA and all kinds of checks it added to allocator >> hot paths, and even CMA is now considering moving to a separate zone. >> > > Hi, how about the problem of this case: > e.g. node 0: 0-4G(dma and dma32) > node 1: 4G-8G(normal), 8-12G(mirror), 12-16G(normal), > so more than one normal zone in a node? or normal zone just span the mirror zone? Normal zone can span the mirror zone just fine. However, it will result in zone scanners such as compaction to skip over the mirror zone inefficiently. Hmm... -- 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