lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2002]   [Mar]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: 2.4.19pre1aa1
    >> seems to me to be that the way we do current swap-out scanning is
    >> virtual, not physical, and thus cannot be per zone => per node.
    >
    > actually if you do process bindings the pte should be all allocated
    > local to the node if numa is enabled, and if there's no binding, no
    > matter if you have rmap or not, the ptes can be spread across the whole
    > system (just like the physical pages in the inactive/active lrus,
    > because they're not per-node).

    Why does it matter if the ptes are spread across the system?
    I get the feeling I'm missing some magic trick here ...

    In reality we're not going to hard-bind every process,
    though we'll try to keep most of the allocations local.

    Imagine I have eight nodes (0..7), each with one zone (0..7).
    I need to free memory from zone 5 ... with the virtual scan,
    it seems to me that all I can do is blunder through the whole
    process list looking for something that happens to have pages
    on zone 5 that aren't being used much? Is this not expensive?
    Won't I end up with a whole bunch of cross-node mem transfers?

    M.

    -
    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/

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:24    [W:0.027 / U:0.248 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site