From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jesse Barnes Subject: Re: A tale of three memory allocators Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 16:56:04 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <516F50407E01324991DD6D07B0531AD52A2D73@cacexc12.americas.cpqcorp.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: xen-devel-admin@lists.sourceforge.net Errors-To: xen-devel-admin@lists.sourceforge.net List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: To: xen-devel@lists.sourceforge.net List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org Rik van Riel redhat.com> writes: > Two out of three is enough. I don't see the need for > both CONFIG_DISCONTIGMEM and CONFIG_VIRTUAL_MEM_MAP. Well, we need it for sn2. We have very large memory holes within a node, so we use the virtual memmap to make the mem_map array within a node virtually contiguous. > I guess that having a NUMA aware allocator could come > in handy though, so guest domains get their memory from > the right node wrt. to where they get CPU time scheduled. Yep, it would probably be a mistake to overoptimize Xen on NUMA at this point, but doing basic things like this makes sense. Jesse ------------------------------------------------------- SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users. Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=6595&alloc_id=14396&op=click