Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933342AbYBVM7x (ORCPT ); Fri, 22 Feb 2008 07:59:53 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754598AbYBVM7p (ORCPT ); Fri, 22 Feb 2008 07:59:45 -0500 Received: from one.firstfloor.org ([213.235.205.2]:60258 "EHLO one.firstfloor.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752716AbYBVM7p (ORCPT ); Fri, 22 Feb 2008 07:59:45 -0500 Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2008 14:00:02 +0100 From: Andi Kleen To: Balbir Singh Cc: Andi Kleen , Nick Piggin , 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 Message-ID: <20080222130002.GA22369@one.firstfloor.org> References: <20080220122338.GA4352@basil.nowhere.org> <47BC2275.4060900@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <200802211535.38932.nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au> <47BD06C2.5030602@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <47BD55F6.5030203@firstfloor.org> <47BE527D.2070109@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <47BE9B11.7090809@firstfloor.org> <47BEBCB7.8000607@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <47BEBCB7.8000607@linux.vnet.ibm.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2107 Lines: 60 On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 05:44:47PM +0530, Balbir Singh wrote: > > My concern with all the points you mentioned is that this solution might need to > change again, No why would it need to change again? > depending on the factors you've mentioned. vmalloc() is good and > straightforward, but it has these dependencies which could call for another > rewrite of the code. The hotplug change would not need a rewrite of anything, just some additional code in the SRAT parser to increase __VMALLOC_RESERVE for each hotplug region. It's likely <= 3 additional lines. > > > > >>>> if we decided to use vmalloc space, we would need 64 > >>>> MB of vmalloc'ed memory > >>> Yes and if you increase mem_map you need exactly the same space > >>> in lowmem too. So increasing the vmalloc reservation for this is > >>> equivalent. Just make sure you use highmem backed vmalloc. > >>> > >> I see two problems with using vmalloc. One, the reservation needs to be done > >> across architectures. > > > > Only on 32bit. Ok hacking it into all 32bit architectures might be > > difficult, but I assume it would be ok to rely on the architecture > > maintainers for that and only enable it on some selected architectures > > using Kconfig for now. > > > > Yes, but that's not such a good idea Waiting for the maintainers? Why not? I assume the memory controller would be primarily used on larger systems anyways and except for i386 these should be mostly 64bit these days anyways. > > On 64bit vmalloc should be by default large enough so it could > > be enabled for all 64bit architectures. > > > >> Two, a big vmalloc chunk is not node aware, > > > > vmalloc_node() > > > > vmalloc_node() would need to work much the same way as mem_map does. I am would? It already is implemented and works just fine AFAIK. I don't understand the rest of your point. -Andi -- 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/