Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757640AbYBUFLS (ORCPT ); Thu, 21 Feb 2008 00:11:18 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751061AbYBUFLH (ORCPT ); Thu, 21 Feb 2008 00:11:07 -0500 Received: from e28smtp06.in.ibm.com ([59.145.155.6]:53085 "EHLO e28esmtp06.in.ibm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751059AbYBUFLF (ORCPT ); Thu, 21 Feb 2008 00:11:05 -0500 Message-ID: <47BD06C2.5030602@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2008 10:36:10 +0530 From: Balbir Singh Reply-To: balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com Organization: IBM User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (X11/20071115) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Nick Piggin CC: Andi Kleen , akpm@osdl.org, torvalds@osdl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] Document huge memory/cache overhead of memory controller in Kconfig References: <20080220122338.GA4352@basil.nowhere.org> <47BC2275.4060900@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <200802211535.38932.nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au> In-Reply-To: <200802211535.38932.nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1725 Lines: 46 Nick Piggin wrote: > On Wednesday 20 February 2008 23:52, Balbir Singh wrote: >> Andi Kleen wrote: >>> Document huge memory/cache overhead of memory controller in Kconfig >>> >>> I was a little surprised that 2.6.25-rc* increased struct page for the >>> memory controller. At least on many x86-64 machines it will not fit into >>> a single cache line now anymore and also costs considerable amounts of >>> RAM. >> The size of struct page earlier was 56 bytes on x86_64 and with 64 bytes it >> won't fit into the cacheline anymore? Please also look at >> http://lwn.net/Articles/234974/ > > BTW. We'll probably want to increase the width of some counters > in struct page at some point for 64-bit, so then it really will > go over with the memory controller! > Hmm... > Actually, an external data structure is a pretty good idea. We > could probably do it easily with a radix tree (pfn->memory > controller). And that might be a better option for distros. > I'll put in my long list of TODOs. I started looking at it yesterday again and here are my early thoughts 1. We could create something similar to mem_map, we would need to handle 4 different ways of creating mem_map. 2. On x86 with 64 GB ram, if we decided to use vmalloc space, we would need 64 MB of vmalloc'ed memory I have not explored your latest suggestion of pfn <-> memory controller mapping yet. I'll explore it and see how that goes. -- Warm Regards, Balbir Singh Linux Technology Center IBM, ISTL -- 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/