lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2003]   [Nov]   [25]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: hash table sizes
jbarnes@sgi.com (Jesse Barnes) wrote:
>
> On Tue, Nov 25, 2003 at 01:07:41PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > the size of these tables dependent upon the number of dentries/inodes/etc
> > which the system is likely to support. And that does depend upon the
> > amount of direct-addressible memory.
> >
> >
> > So hum. As a starting point, what happens if we do:
> >
> > - vfs_caches_init(num_physpages);
> > + vfs_caches_init(min(num_physpages, pages_in_ZONE_NORMAL));
> >
> > ?
>
> Something like that might be ok, but on our system, all memory is in
> ZONE_DMA...
>

Well yes, we'd want

vfs_caches_init(min(num_physpages, some_platform_limit()));

which on ia32 would evaluate to nr_free_buffer_pages() and on ia64 would
evaluate to the size of one of those zones.

If the machine has zillions of small zones then perhaps this will result in
an undersized hashtable.
-
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 13:58    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans