From: Andrea Arcangeli <andrea@suse.de>
To: Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>,
wli@holomorphy.com, tiwai@suse.de, ak@suse.de, ak@muc.de,
tripperda@nvidia.com, discuss@x86-64.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [discuss] Re: 32-bit dma allocations on 64-bit platforms
Date: Fri, 25 Jun 2004 05:11:01 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20040625031101.GH30687@dualathlon.random> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <40DB7D25.1090207@yahoo.com.au>
On Fri, Jun 25, 2004 at 11:17:25AM +1000, Nick Piggin wrote:
> It can easily be modified if required though. Is there a need to be
> tuning these different things? This is probably where we should hold
I did tune them differently in 2.4 mainline at least. 256 ratio for dma
and 32 ratio for lowmem, the lowmem is already quite critical in most
machines with >2G of ram so ratio should be lower than dma. for example
on 64bit you want the 16M of dma to be completely reserved only on
machines with >4G of ram. The 256 dma ratio applies fine to 64bit archs,
and the 32 never applies to 64bit archs and it only applies to the
highmem boxes.
the 256 and 32 numbers aren't random, they're calculated this way:
4096M of 64bit platform / 16M = 256
32G of 32bit platform / 1G = 32
That means with my 2.4 algorithm any 64bit machine with >4G has its
whole dma zone reserved to __GFP_DMA.
and at the same time any 32bit machine with 32G of ram doesn't allow
anything but GFP_KERNEL to go in lowmem, this is fundamental.
Now you may very well argue about the numbers not being perfect and this
is still a bit hardcoded with the highmem issues in mind, but it would
be possible to generalize it even more and I do see a benefit in not
having a fixed number for both issues, and to get a bit more of
flexibility that the 2.4 has over the 2.6 one.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-06-25 3:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 58+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <m3acyu6pwd.fsf@averell.firstfloor.org>
[not found] ` <20040623213643.GB32456@hygelac>
2004-06-23 23:46 ` 32-bit dma allocations on 64-bit platforms Andi Kleen
2004-06-24 11:13 ` Takashi Iwai
2004-06-24 11:29 ` [discuss] " Andi Kleen
2004-06-24 14:36 ` Takashi Iwai
2004-06-24 14:42 ` Andi Kleen
2004-06-24 14:58 ` Takashi Iwai
2004-06-24 15:29 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2004-06-24 15:48 ` Nick Piggin
2004-06-24 16:52 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2004-06-24 16:56 ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-06-24 17:32 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2004-06-24 17:38 ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-06-24 18:02 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2004-06-24 18:13 ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-06-24 18:27 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2004-06-24 18:50 ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-06-24 21:54 ` Andrew Morton
2004-06-24 22:08 ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-06-24 22:45 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2004-06-24 22:51 ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-06-24 23:09 ` Andrew Morton
2004-06-24 23:15 ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-06-25 6:16 ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-06-25 2:39 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2004-06-25 2:47 ` Andrew Morton
2004-06-25 3:19 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2004-06-24 22:11 ` Andrew Morton
2004-06-24 23:09 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2004-06-25 1:17 ` Nick Piggin
2004-06-25 3:11 ` Andrea Arcangeli [this message]
2004-06-24 22:21 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2004-06-24 22:36 ` Andrew Morton
2004-06-24 23:15 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2004-06-24 22:37 ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-06-24 22:40 ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-06-24 23:21 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2004-06-24 23:45 ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-06-24 17:39 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2004-06-24 17:53 ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-06-24 18:07 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2004-06-24 18:29 ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-06-24 16:04 ` Takashi Iwai
2004-06-24 17:16 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2004-06-24 18:33 ` Takashi Iwai
2004-06-24 18:44 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2004-06-25 15:50 ` Takashi Iwai
2004-06-25 17:30 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2004-06-25 17:39 ` Takashi Iwai
2004-06-25 17:45 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2004-06-24 14:45 ` Terence Ripperda
2004-06-24 15:41 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2004-06-24 15:44 ` Terence Ripperda
2004-06-24 16:15 ` [discuss] " Andi Kleen
2004-06-24 17:22 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2004-06-24 22:28 ` Terence Ripperda
2004-06-24 18:51 ` Andi Kleen
2004-06-26 4:58 ` David Mosberger
2004-06-24 13:48 Jesse Barnes
2004-06-24 14:39 ` Terence Ripperda
2004-06-24 15:01 ` [discuss] " Andi Kleen
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20040625031101.GH30687@dualathlon.random \
--to=andrea@suse.de \
--cc=ak@muc.de \
--cc=ak@suse.de \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=discuss@x86-64.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au \
--cc=tiwai@suse.de \
--cc=tripperda@nvidia.com \
--cc=wli@holomorphy.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.