lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2005]   [Nov]   [1]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [Lhms-devel] [PATCH 0/7] Fragmentation Avoidance V19
Kamezawa Hiroyuki wrote:
> Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
>> so it's all about expectations: _could_ you reasonably remove a piece
>> of RAM? Customer will say: "I have stopped all nonessential services,
>> and free RAM is at 90%, still I cannot remove that piece of faulty
>> RAM, fix the kernel!". No reasonable customer will say: "True, I have
>> all RAM used up in mlock()ed sections, but i want to remove some RAM
>> nevertheless".
>>
> Hi, I'm one of men in -lhms
>
> In my understanding...
> - Memory Hotremove on IBM's LPAR? approach is
> [remove some amount of memory from somewhere.]
> For this approach, Mel's patch will work well.
> But this will not guaranntee a user can remove specified range of
> memory at any time because how memory range is used is not defined by
> an admin
> but by the kernel automatically. But to extract some amount of memory,
> Mel's patch is very important and they need this.
>
One more consideration...
Some cpus which support virtialization will be shipped by some vendor in near future.
If someone uses vitualized OS, only problem is *resizing*.
Hypervisor will be able to remap semi-physical pages anyware with hardware assistance
but system resizing needs operating system assistance.
To this direction, [remove some amount of memory from somewhere.] is important approach.

-- Kame


-
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: 2005-11-01 18:02    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans