Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 27 Aug 2004 09:42:05 +0900 | From | Hiroyuki KAMEZAWA <> | Subject | Re: [Lhms-devel] Re: [RFC] buddy allocator without bitmap [3/4] |
| |
Dave Hansen wrote: >>1. Now, I think some small parts, some essence of mem_section which >> makes pfn_valid() faster may be good. > > > The only question is what it will take when there's a partially populate > mem_section. We'll almost certainly have to allow it, but the real > question is whether or not we will ever have a partially populated one > that's not at the end of memory. > Hmm....I cannot answer it fully.
My tiger4 (Itanium x 2) shows aligned_order=0, because it has a mem_map start with address 0x????????3(I forget now), odd number ;(. I like a mechine in which all memory are aligned.....
>>And another way, >> >>2. A method which enables page -> page's max_order calculation >> may be good and consistent way in this no-bitmap approach. >> >>But this problem would be my week-end homework :). > > > Instead of adding more stuff to the mem_section, we might be able to > (ab)use more stuff in the mem_map's mem_map, like I am with > page->section right now.
I wonder if there is another way which doesn't increase memory usage in boottime, it will be better. I'll going on considering the way to fix nr_mem_map things.
Thanks -- Kame
-- --the clue is these footmarks leading to the door.-- KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
- 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/
| |