Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1750909AbWBFJ6K (ORCPT ); Mon, 6 Feb 2006 04:58:10 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1750913AbWBFJ6K (ORCPT ); Mon, 6 Feb 2006 04:58:10 -0500 Received: from smtp.osdl.org ([65.172.181.4]:33180 "EHLO smtp.osdl.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750909AbWBFJ6I (ORCPT ); Mon, 6 Feb 2006 04:58:08 -0500 Date: Mon, 6 Feb 2006 01:57:09 -0800 From: Andrew Morton To: Paul Jackson Cc: dgc@sgi.com, steiner@sgi.com, Simon.Derr@bull.net, ak@suse.de, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, clameter@sgi.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] cpuset memory spread basic implementation Message-Id: <20060206015709.01bf4d16.akpm@osdl.org> In-Reply-To: <20060206013227.2407cf8c.pj@sgi.com> References: <20060204071910.10021.8437.sendpatchset@jackhammer.engr.sgi.com> <20060205203711.2c855971.akpm@osdl.org> <20060205225629.5d887661.pj@sgi.com> <20060205230816.4ae6b6e2.akpm@osdl.org> <20060206013227.2407cf8c.pj@sgi.com> X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 1.0.4 (GTK+ 1.2.10; i386-redhat-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 678 Lines: 18 Paul Jackson wrote: > > Is page vs slab cache the appropriate level of granularity? > I guess so. Doing it on a per-cpuset+per-slab or per-cpuset+per-inode basis would get a bit complex implementation-wise, I expect. And a smart application could roughly implement that itself anyway by turning spreading on and off as it goes. One does wonder about the buffer-head slab - it's pretty tightly bound to pagecache.. - 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/