From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2007 11:47:14 -0700 (PDT) From: Christoph Lameter Subject: Re: [PATCH v6][RFC] Fix hugetlb pool allocation with empty nodes In-Reply-To: <20070612050702.GT3798@us.ibm.com> Message-ID: References: <20070612021245.GH3798@us.ibm.com> <20070612023421.GL3798@us.ibm.com> <20070612031718.GP3798@us.ibm.com> <20070612033050.GR3798@us.ibm.com> <20070612050702.GT3798@us.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Nishanth Aravamudan Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: On Mon, 11 Jun 2007, Nishanth Aravamudan wrote: > Hrm, maybe that will work -- but then it means that if one is > interleaving huge pages, it will interfere with the interleaving of > small pages. Given that right now, huge pages are a rather precious > commodity, do we want this? The number of pages interleaved for small pages is quite high. So there will not be a significant effect. If we use this counter then we can fall back on existing functionality in the memory policy subsystem. -- 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