Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1161068AbXAZRUu (ORCPT ); Fri, 26 Jan 2007 12:20:50 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1161066AbXAZRUt (ORCPT ); Fri, 26 Jan 2007 12:20:49 -0500 Received: from calculon.skynet.ie ([193.1.99.88]:41011 "EHLO calculon.skynet.ie" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1161068AbXAZRUt (ORCPT ); Fri, 26 Jan 2007 12:20:49 -0500 Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2007 17:20:47 +0000 (GMT) From: Mel Gorman X-X-Sender: mel@skynet.skynet.ie To: Christoph Lameter Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/8] Allow huge page allocations to use GFP_HIGH_MOVABLE In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: <20070125234458.28809.5412.sendpatchset@skynet.skynet.ie> <20070125234558.28809.21103.sendpatchset@skynet.skynet.ie> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1032 Lines: 25 On Fri, 26 Jan 2007, Christoph Lameter wrote: > On Fri, 26 Jan 2007, Mel Gorman wrote: > >> Because Andrew has made it pretty clear he will not take those patches on the >> grounds of complexity - at least until it can be shown that they fix the e1000 >> problem. Any improvement on the behavior of those patches such as address >> biasing to allow memory hot-remove of the higher addresses makes them even >> more complex. > > What is the e1000 problem? Jumbo packet allocation via GFP_KERNEL? > Yes. Potentially the anti-fragmentation patches could address this by clustering atomic allocations together as much as possible. -- Mel Gorman Part-time Phd Student Linux Technology Center University of Limerick IBM Dublin Software Lab - 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/