Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Thu, 24 Oct 2002 10:54:49 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Thu, 24 Oct 2002 10:54:21 -0400 Received: from franka.aracnet.com ([216.99.193.44]:24761 "EHLO franka.aracnet.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Thu, 24 Oct 2002 10:54:14 -0400 Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2002 07:51:46 -0700 From: "Martin J. Bligh" Reply-To: "Martin J. Bligh" To: Dave McCracken , Bill Davidsen cc: Rik van Riel , "Eric W. Biederman" , Andrew Morton , Linux Kernel , Linux Memory Management Subject: Re: [PATCH 2.5.43-mm2] New shared page table patch Message-ID: <2834413140.1035445904@[10.10.2.3]> In-Reply-To: <9100000.1035470286@baldur.austin.ibm.com> References: <9100000.1035470286@baldur.austin.ibm.com> X-Mailer: Mulberry/2.1.2 (Win32) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 846 Lines: 21 >>> Another thought, how does this play with NUMA systems? I don't have the >>> problem, but presumably there are implications. >> >> At some point we'll probably only want one shared set per node. >> Gets tricky when you migrate processes across nodes though - will >> need more thought > > Page tables can only be shared when they're pointing to the same > data pages anyway, so I think it's just part of the larger problem > of node-local memory. Yes, same problem as text replication. You're right, it's probably not worth solving otherwise - too small a percentage of the real problem. M. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/