linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Martin J. Bligh" <mbligh@mbligh.org>
To: David Lang <david.lang@digitalinsight.com>,
	Magnus Damm <magnus.damm@gmail.com>
Cc: Dave Hansen <haveblue@us.ibm.com>,
	Magnus Damm <magnus@valinux.co.jp>, linux-mm <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/07][RFC] i386: NUMA emulation
Date: Mon, 03 Oct 2005 07:45:59 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <77150000.1128350759@[10.10.2.4]> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.62.0510030031170.11095@qynat.qvtvafvgr.pbz>

--David Lang <david.lang@digitalinsight.com> wrote (on Monday, October 03, 2005 00:34:40 -0700):

> On Mon, 3 Oct 2005, Magnus Damm wrote:
> 
>> On 10/1/05, Dave Hansen <haveblue@us.ibm.com> wrote:
>>> On Fri, 2005-09-30 at 16:33 +0900, Magnus Damm wrote:
>>>> These patches implement NUMA memory node emulation for regular i386 PC:s.
>>>> 
>>>> NUMA emulation could be used to provide coarse-grained memory resource control
>>>> using CPUSETS. Another use is as a test environment for NUMA memory code or
>>>> CPUSETS using an i386 emulator such as QEMU.
>>> 
>>> This patch set basically allows the "NUMA depends on SMP" dependency to
>>> be removed.  I'm not sure this is the right approach.  There will likely
>>> never be a real-world NUMA system without SMP.  So, this set would seem
>>> to include some increased (#ifdef) complexity for supporting SMP && !
>>> NUMA, which will likely never happen in the real world.
>> 
>> Yes, this patch set removes "NUMA depends on SMP". It also adds some
>> simple NUMA emulation code too, but I am sure you are aware of that!
>> =)
>> 
>> I agree that it is very unlikely to find a single-processor NUMA
>> system in the real world. So yes, "[PATCH 02/07] i386: numa on
>> non-smp" adds _some_ extra complexity. But because SMP is set when
>> supporting more than one cpu, and NUMA is set when supporting more
>> than one memory node, I see no reason why they should be dependent on
>> each other. Except that they depend on each other today and breaking
>> them loose will increase complexity a bit.
> 
> hmm, observation from the peanut gallery, would it make sene to look at 
> useing the NUMA code on single proc machines that use PAE to access 
> more then 4G or ram on a 32 bit system?

2 problems:

1) there aren't any ;-)
2) The memory is not physically differently separated from the CPUs, so
it's not NUMA.

M.

--
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: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>

  parent reply	other threads:[~2005-10-03 14:45 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 38+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2005-09-30  7:33 Magnus Damm
2005-09-30  7:33 ` [PATCH 01/07] i386: srat non acpi Magnus Damm, Magnus Damm
2005-09-30  7:33 ` [PATCH 02/07] i386: numa on non-smp Magnus Damm, Magnus Damm
2005-09-30  7:33 ` [PATCH 03/07] cpuset: smp or numa Magnus Damm, Magnus Damm
2005-09-30  7:33 ` [PATCH 04/07] i386: numa warning fix Magnus Damm, Isaku Yamahata
2005-09-30  7:33 ` [PATCH 05/07] i386: sparsemem on pc Magnus Damm, Magnus Damm
2005-09-30 15:25   ` Dave Hansen
2005-10-01  0:32     ` Magnus Damm
2005-09-30  7:33 ` [PATCH 06/07] i386: discontigmem " Magnus Damm, Magnus Damm
2005-09-30  7:33 ` [PATCH 07/07] i386: numa emulation " Magnus Damm, Isaku Yamahata
2005-09-30 18:55   ` Dave Hansen
2005-10-03  9:59     ` Magnus Damm
2005-10-03 16:16       ` Dave Hansen
2005-10-04  5:06         ` Magnus Damm
2005-10-04  7:52   ` Hirokazu Takahashi
2005-10-04  9:49     ` Magnus Damm
2005-09-30 15:23 ` [PATCH 00/07][RFC] i386: NUMA emulation Dave Hansen
2005-10-03  2:08   ` Magnus Damm
2005-10-03  7:34     ` David Lang
2005-10-03 10:02       ` Magnus Damm
2005-10-03 13:33         ` David Lang
2005-10-03 14:59           ` Martin J. Bligh
2005-10-03 15:03             ` David Lang
2005-10-03 15:08               ` Martin J. Bligh
2005-10-03 15:13                 ` David Lang
2005-10-03 15:25                   ` Martin J. Bligh
2005-10-03 15:32                     ` David Lang
2005-10-03 15:54                       ` Martin J. Bligh
2005-10-03 16:44                         ` David Lang
2005-10-03 14:45       ` Martin J. Bligh [this message]
2005-10-03 14:49         ` David Lang
2005-10-03  3:21   ` Paul Jackson
2005-10-03  5:05     ` Magnus Damm
2005-10-03  5:26       ` Hirokazu Takahashi
2005-10-03  5:33       ` Paul Jackson
2005-10-03  5:59         ` Magnus Damm
2005-10-03  7:26           ` Paul Jackson
2005-10-03  5:34       ` Paul Jackson

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to='77150000.1128350759@[10.10.2.4]' \
    --to=mbligh@mbligh.org \
    --cc=david.lang@digitalinsight.com \
    --cc=haveblue@us.ibm.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=magnus.damm@gmail.com \
    --cc=magnus@valinux.co.jp \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox