![]() | |||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
On Fri, 2006-11-10 at 10:16 -0800, Christoph Lameter wrote: > On Wed, 8 Nov 2006, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote: > > > I wonder there are no code for creating NODE_DATA() for device-only-node. > > On IA64 we remap nodes with no memory / cpus to the nearest node with > memory. I think that is sufficient. I don't think this happens anymore. Back in the ~2.6.5 days, when we would configure our numa platforms with 100% of memory interleaved [in hardware at cache line granularity], the cpus would move to the interleaved "pseudo-node" and the memoryless nodes would be removed. numactl --hardware would show something like this: # uname -r 2.6.5-7.244-default # numactl --hardware available: 1 nodes (0-0) node 0 size: 65443 MB node 0 free: 64506 MB I started seeing different behavior about the time SPARSEMEM went in. Now, with a 2.6.16 base kernel [same platform, hardware interleaved memory], I see: # uname -r# numactl --hardware available: 5 nodes (0-4) node 0 size: 0 MB node 0 free: 0 MB node 1 size: 0 MB node 1 free: 0 MB node 2 size: 0 MB node 2 free: 0 MB node 3 size: 0 MB node 3 free: 0 MB node 4 size: 65439 MB node 4 free: 64492 MB node distances: node 0 1 2 3 4 0: 10 17 17 17 14 1: 17 10 17 17 14 2: 17 17 10 17 14 3: 17 17 17 10 14 4: 14 14 14 14 10 2.6.16.21-0.8-default [Aside: The firmware/SLIT says that the interleaved memory is closer to all nodes that other nodes' memory. This has interesting implications for the "overflow" zone lists...] Lee - 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: 2006-11-10 19:31 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||