From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: DISCONTIGMEM is deprecated Date: Sun, 28 Apr 2019 01:11:07 -0700 Message-ID: <20190428081107.GA30901@infradead.org> References: <20190419094335.GJ18914@techsingularity.net> <20190419140521.GI7751@bombadil.infradead.org> <20190421063859.GA19926@rapoport-lnx> <20190421132606.GJ7751@bombadil.infradead.org> <20190421211604.GN18914@techsingularity.net> <20190423071354.GB12114@infradead.org> <20190424113352.GA6278@rapoport-lnx> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20190424113352.GA6278@rapoport-lnx> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Mike Rapoport Cc: Christoph Hellwig , Mel Gorman , Matthew Wilcox , Andrew Morton , Mikulas Patocka , James Bottomley , linux-parisc@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, Vlastimil Babka , LKML , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-arch.vger.kernel.org On Wed, Apr 24, 2019 at 02:33:53PM +0300, Mike Rapoport wrote: > On Tue, Apr 23, 2019 at 12:13:54AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > On Sun, Apr 21, 2019 at 10:16:04PM +0100, Mel Gorman wrote: > > > 32-bit NUMA systems should be non-existent in practice. The last NUMA > > > system I'm aware of that was both NUMA and 32-bit only died somewhere > > > between 2004 and 2007. If someone is running a 64-bit capable system in > > > 32-bit mode with NUMA, they really are just punishing themselves for fun. > > > > Can we mark it as BROKEN to see if someone shouts and then remove it > > a year or two down the road? Or just kill it off now.. > > How about making SPARSEMEM default for x86-32? Sounds good. Another question: I always found the option to even select the memory models like a bad tradeoff. Can we really expect a user to make a sane choice? I'd rather stick to a relativelty optimal choice based on arch and maybe a few other parameters (NUMA or not for example) and stick to it, reducing the testing matrix. From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Date: Sun, 28 Apr 2019 01:11:07 -0700 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: DISCONTIGMEM is deprecated Message-ID: <20190428081107.GA30901@infradead.org> References: <20190419094335.GJ18914@techsingularity.net> <20190419140521.GI7751@bombadil.infradead.org> <20190421063859.GA19926@rapoport-lnx> <20190421132606.GJ7751@bombadil.infradead.org> <20190421211604.GN18914@techsingularity.net> <20190423071354.GB12114@infradead.org> <20190424113352.GA6278@rapoport-lnx> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20190424113352.GA6278@rapoport-lnx> To: Mike Rapoport Cc: Christoph Hellwig , Mel Gorman , Matthew Wilcox , Andrew Morton , Mikulas Patocka , James Bottomley , linux-parisc@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, Vlastimil Babka , LKML , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Message-ID: <20190428081107.NE-rsheyOeCLMk2h93yCBFX-caZO9wTW5OgbCT3tQwU@z> On Wed, Apr 24, 2019 at 02:33:53PM +0300, Mike Rapoport wrote: > On Tue, Apr 23, 2019 at 12:13:54AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > On Sun, Apr 21, 2019 at 10:16:04PM +0100, Mel Gorman wrote: > > > 32-bit NUMA systems should be non-existent in practice. The last NUMA > > > system I'm aware of that was both NUMA and 32-bit only died somewhere > > > between 2004 and 2007. If someone is running a 64-bit capable system in > > > 32-bit mode with NUMA, they really are just punishing themselves for fun. > > > > Can we mark it as BROKEN to see if someone shouts and then remove it > > a year or two down the road? Or just kill it off now.. > > How about making SPARSEMEM default for x86-32? Sounds good. Another question: I always found the option to even select the memory models like a bad tradeoff. Can we really expect a user to make a sane choice? I'd rather stick to a relativelty optimal choice based on arch and maybe a few other parameters (NUMA or not for example) and stick to it, reducing the testing matrix.