From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: by zproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id n1so1530194nzf for ; Tue, 15 Nov 2005 00:34:16 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2005 17:34:16 +0900 From: Magnus Damm Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/05] NUMA: Generic code In-Reply-To: <200511110516.37980.ak@suse.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Content-Disposition: inline References: <20051110090920.8083.54147.sendpatchset@cherry.local> <20051110090925.8083.45887.sendpatchset@cherry.local> <200511110516.37980.ak@suse.de> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Andi Kleen Cc: Magnus Damm , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, pj@sgi.com List-ID: On 11/11/05, Andi Kleen wrote: > On Thursday 10 November 2005 10:08, Magnus Damm wrote: > > Generic CONFIG_NUMA_EMU code. > > > > This patch adds generic NUMA emulation code to the kernel. The code > > provides the architectures with functions that calculate the size of > > emulated nodes, together with configuration stuff such as Kconfig and > > kernel command line code. > > IMHO making it generic and bloated like this is total overkill > for this simple debugginghack. I think it is better to keep > it simple and hiden it in a architecture specific dark corners, not expose it > like this. My plan with breaking out the NUMA emulation code was to merge my i386 stuff with the x86_64 code, but as you say - it might be overkill. What do you think about the fact that real NUMA nodes now can be divided into several smaller nodes? / magnus -- 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