lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2003]   [Dec]   [1]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: hash table sizes
    >> It would be very nice to have some confirmation that the size of these
    >> tables is being appropriately chosen, too. Maybe we should shrink 'em 32x
    >> and see who complains...
    >
    > Why dont we just do node round robin allocations during boot? This
    > should mean the static boot time hashes would at least end up on
    > different nodes.

    We could probably implement a generic striped allocate, which would
    do a vmalloc or similar on 64 bit, and either the magic boottime
    node-alloc hack, or just a straight node 0 alloc on 32 bit (ie use
    vmalloc where needed, without crippling other platforms).

    Someone had a patch to do round-robin already (Manfred?) - IMHO doing
    it from the node with the most free mem each time would be better, if
    we're not going to stripe.

    > 0 248652
    > 1 7374

    ...

    but yes, that does look utterly screwed ;-)

    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 13:59    [W:0.029 / U:57.904 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site