From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2007 10:56:13 -0700 (PDT) From: Christoph Lameter Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/10] foundations for reserve-based allocation In-Reply-To: <20070806102922.907530000@chello.nl> Message-ID: References: <20070806102922.907530000@chello.nl> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Peter Zijlstra Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, David Miller , Andrew Morton , Daniel Phillips , Pekka Enberg , Matt Mackall , Lee Schermerhorn , Steve Dickson List-ID: On Mon, 6 Aug 2007, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > We want a guarantee for N bytes from kmalloc(), this translates to a demand > on the slab allocator for 2*N+m (due to the power-of-two nature of kmalloc > slabs), where m is the meta-data needed by the allocator itself. The guarantee occurs in what context? Looks like its global here but allocations may be restricted to a cpuset context? What happens in a GFP_THISNODE allocation? Or a memory policy restricted allocations? > So we need functions translating our demanded kmalloc space into a page > reserve limit, and then need to provide a reserve of pages. Only kmalloc? What about skb heads and such? > And we need to ensure that once we hit the reserve, the slab allocator honours > the reserve's access. That is, a regular allocation may not get objects from > a slab allocated from the reserves. >>From a cpuset we may hit the reserves since cpuset memory is out and then the rest of the system fails allocations? -- 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