From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Tue, 5 Dec 2006 08:05:16 -0800 (PST) From: Christoph Lameter Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add __GFP_MOVABLE for callers to flag allocations that may be migrated In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: <20061130170746.GA11363@skynet.ie> <20061130173129.4ebccaa2.akpm@osdl.org> <20061201110103.08d0cf3d.akpm@osdl.org> <20061204140747.GA21662@skynet.ie> <20061204113051.4e90b249.akpm@osdl.org> <20061204143435.6ab587db.akpm@osdl.org> <20061205101629.5cb78828.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Mel Gorman Cc: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki , akpm@osdl.org, apw@shadowen.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Tue, 5 Dec 2006, Mel Gorman wrote: > That is one possibility. There are people working on fake nodes for containers > at the moment. If that pans out, the infrastructure would be available to > create one node per DIMM. Right that is a hack in use for one project. We would be adding huge amounts of VM overhead if we do a node per DIMM. So a desktop system with two dimms is to be treated like a NUMA system? Or how else do we deal with the multitude of load balancing situations that the additional nodes will generate? -- 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