Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 14 Dec 2004 12:10:57 -0800 | From | "Martin J. Bligh" <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 0/3] NUMA boot hash allocation interleaving |
| |
>> Yup, makes a lot of sense to me to stripe these, for the caches that >> are global (ie inodes, dentries, etc). Only question I'd have is >> didn't Manfred or someone (Andi?) do this before? Or did that never >> get accepted? I know we talked about it a while back. > > Are you thinking of the 2006-06-05 patch from Andi about using > the NUMA policy API for boot time allocation? > > If so, that patch was accepted, but affects neither allocations > performed via alloc_bootmem nor __get_free_pages, which are > currently used to allocate these hashes. vmalloc, however, does > behave as desired with Andi's patch.
Nope, was for the hashes, but I think maybe it was all vapourware.
> Which is why vmalloc was chosen to solve this problem. There were > other more complicated possible solutions (e.g. multi-level hash tables, > with the bottommost/largest level being allocated across all nodes), > however those would have been so intrusive as to be unpalatable. > So the vmalloc solution seemed reasonable, as long as it is used > only on architectures with plentiful vmalloc space.
Yup, seems like a reasonable approach.
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/
| |