From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andi Kleen Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 04:58:55 +0000 Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] NUMA boot hash allocation interleaving Message-Id: <20041215045855.GH27225@wotan.suse.de> List-Id: References: <50260000.1103061628@flay> In-Reply-To: <50260000.1103061628@flay> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: "Martin J. Bligh" Cc: Brent Casavant , Andi Kleen , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org > > And just to clarify, are you saying you want to see this before inclusion > > in mainline kernels, or that it would be nice to have but not necessary? > > I'd say it's a nice to have, rather than necessary, as long as it's not > forced upon people. Maybe a config option that's on by default on ia64 > or something. Causing yourself TLB problems is much more acceptable than > causing it for others ;-) Given that Brent did lots of benchmarks which didn't show any slowdowns I don't think this is really needed (at least as long as nobody demonstrates a ireal slowdown from the patch). And having such special cases is always ugly, better not have them when not needed. -Andi