Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 14 Jan 2005 01:34:25 -0800 | From | Andrew Morton <> | Subject | Re: [patch] mm: Reimplementation of dynamic percpu memory allocator |
| |
Ravikiran G Thirumalai <kiran@in.ibm.com> wrote: > > Just out of curiosity, is bubble > sort unpopular or having two sort functions in the kernel source tree an > issue here?
yes and yes ;)
> > > > Why cannot the code simply call vmalloc rather than copying its internals? > > Node local allocation. vmalloc cannot ensure pages for correspomding > cpus are node local. Also, design goal was to allocate pages for > cpu_possible cpus only. With plain vmalloc, we will end up allocating > pages for NR_CPUS.
So... is it not possible to enhance vmalloc() for node-awareness, then just use it?
- 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/
| |