Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S968393AbWLEQF2 (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 Dec 2006 11:05:28 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S968396AbWLEQF2 (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 Dec 2006 11:05:28 -0500 Received: from omx2-ext.sgi.com ([192.48.171.19]:47329 "EHLO omx2.sgi.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S968393AbWLEQF1 (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 Dec 2006 11:05:27 -0500 Date: Tue, 5 Dec 2006 08:05:16 -0800 (PST) From: Christoph Lameter To: Mel Gorman cc: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki , akpm@osdl.org, apw@shadowen.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add __GFP_MOVABLE for callers to flag allocations that may be migrated In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: <20061130170746.GA11363@skynet.ie> <20061130173129.4ebccaa2.akpm@osdl.org> <20061201110103.08d0cf3d.akpm@osdl.org> <20061204140747.GA21662@skynet.ie> <20061204113051.4e90b249.akpm@osdl.org> <20061204143435.6ab587db.akpm@osdl.org> <20061205101629.5cb78828.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 778 Lines: 20 On Tue, 5 Dec 2006, Mel Gorman wrote: > That is one possibility. There are people working on fake nodes for containers > at the moment. If that pans out, the infrastructure would be available to > create one node per DIMM. Right that is a hack in use for one project. We would be adding huge amounts of VM overhead if we do a node per DIMM. So a desktop system with two dimms is to be treated like a NUMA system? Or how else do we deal with the multitude of load balancing situations that the additional nodes will generate? - 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/