Re: [PATCH/RFC 0/5] Memory Policy Cleanups and Enhancements

[Lee Schermerhorn <Lee.Schermerhorn@hp.com>]

On Thu, 2007-09-13 at 16:31 +0100, Mel Gorman wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-09-13 at 09:57 -0400, Lee Schermerhorn wrote:
> > On Wed, 2007-09-12 at 15:17 -0700, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> > > On Tue, 11 Sep 2007, Lee Schermerhorn wrote:
> > > 
> > > > Andi, Christoph, Mel [added to cc]:
> > > > 
> > > > Any comments on these patches, posted 30aug?  I've rebased to
> > > > 23-rc4-mm1, but before reposting, I wanted to give you a chance to
> > > > comment.
> > > 
> > > Sorry that it took some time but I only just got around to look at them. 
> > > The one patch that I acked may be of higher priority and should probably 
> > > go in immediately to be merged for 2.6.24.
> > 
> > OK.  I'll pull that from the set and post it separately.  I'll see if it
> > conflicts with Mel's set.  If so, we'll need to decide on the ordering.
> > Do we think Mel's patches will make .24?
> > 
> 
> I am hoping they will. They remove the nasty hack in relation to
> MPOL_BIND applying to the top two highest zones when ZONE_MOVABLE is
> configured and let MPOL_BIND use a node-local policy which I feel is
> important. There hasn't been a consensus on this yet and I would expect
> that to be hashed out at the start of the merge window as usual.

OK.  I haven't had a chance to check your patch for the mem controller
issue yet.  Should I test with your latest series that uses the struct
containing the zone id?  I know that Christoph had concerns about
increasing the number of cache lines.  Which way do you think we'll go
on this?

<snip>

Lee

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>