From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp-out.google.com ([216.239.45.13]:55983 "EHLO smtp-out.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S965962AbXDBVoM (ORCPT ); Mon, 2 Apr 2007 17:44:12 -0400 Message-ID: <46117916.2040601@google.com> Date: Mon, 02 Apr 2007 14:43:50 -0700 From: Martin Bligh MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] x86_64: Switch to SPARSE_VIRTUAL References: <20070401071024.23757.4113.sendpatchset@schroedinger.engr.sgi.com> <20070401071029.23757.78021.sendpatchset@schroedinger.engr.sgi.com> <200704011246.52238.ak@suse.de> <1175544797.22373.62.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1175548086.22373.99.camel@localhost.localdomain> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Christoph Lameter Cc: Dave Hansen , Andi Kleen , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki , Andy Whitcroft List-ID: > Note that these arguments on DISCONTIG are flame bait for many SGIers. > We usually see this as an attack on DISCONTIG/VMEMMAP which is the > existing best performing implementation for page_to_pfn and vice > versa. Please lets stop the polarization. We want one consistent scheme > to manage memory everywhere. I do not care what its called as long as it > covers all the bases and is not a glaring performance regresssion (like > SPARSEMEM so far). The main conceptual difference (in my mind) was not having one bastardized data structure (pg_data_t) that meant different things in different situations (is it a node, or a section of discontig mem?). Also we didn't support discontig mem within a node (at least with the old discontigmem), which was partly the result of that hybridization. Beyond that, it's just naming really. M.