From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2005 14:16:54 -0700 (PDT) From: Christoph Lameter Subject: Re: [NUMA] /proc//numa_maps to show on which nodes pages reside In-Reply-To: <1121113875.15095.45.camel@localhost> Message-ID: References: <1121102433.15095.26.camel@localhost> <1121113875.15095.45.camel@localhost> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Dave Hansen Cc: linux-mm , ia64 list , pj@sgi.com List-ID: On Mon, 11 Jul 2005, Dave Hansen wrote: > Well, my point was that, if we have two, the numa_maps can be completely > derived in userspace from the information in memory_maps plus sysfs > alone. So, why increase the kernel's complexity with two > implementations that can do the exact same thing? Yes, it might make > the batch scheduler do one more pathname lookup, but that's not the > kernel's problem :) > > BTW, are you planning on using SPARSEMEM whenever NUMA is enabled in the > future? I am not sure if we will be using SPARSEMEM or not. It would not be good to make the numa_maps patch depend on SPARSEMEM since that is an optional feature right now. -- 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: aart@kvack.org