From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from d01relay06.pok.ibm.com (d01relay06.pok.ibm.com [9.56.227.116]) by e2.ny.us.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id lBDGnNPi020090 for ; Thu, 13 Dec 2007 11:49:23 -0500 Received: from d03av03.boulder.ibm.com (d03av03.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.195.169]) by d01relay06.pok.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v8.7) with ESMTP id lBDGnMUb1175564 for ; Thu, 13 Dec 2007 11:49:22 -0500 Received: from d03av03.boulder.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d03av03.boulder.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.13.3) with ESMTP id lBDGnEoQ015222 for ; Thu, 13 Dec 2007 09:49:16 -0700 Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2007 08:49:08 -0800 From: Nishanth Aravamudan Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/2] hugetlb: introduce nr_overcommit_hugepages sysctl Message-ID: <20071213164908.GE17526@us.ibm.com> References: <20071213074156.GA17526@us.ibm.com> <1197562629.21438.20.camel@localhost> <20071213164453.GC17526@us.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20071213164453.GC17526@us.ibm.com> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Dave Hansen Cc: agl@us.ibm.com, wli@holomorphy.com, mel@csn.ul.ie, apw@shadowen.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, lee.schermerhorn@hp.com, linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: On 13.12.2007 [08:44:53 -0800], Nishanth Aravamudan wrote: > On 13.12.2007 [08:17:08 -0800], Dave Hansen wrote: > > On Wed, 2007-12-12 at 23:41 -0800, Nishanth Aravamudan wrote: > > > While examining the code to support /proc/sys/vm/hugetlb_dynamic_pool, I > > > became convinced that having a boolean sysctl was insufficient: > > > > > > 1) To support per-node control of hugepages, I have previously submitted > > > patches to add a sysfs attribute related to nr_hugepages. However, with > > > a boolean global value and per-mount quota enforcement constraining the > > > dynamic pool, adding corresponding control of the dynamic pool on a > > > per-node basis seems inconsistent to me. > > > > Documentation/sysctl, please :) > > Err, yes, will need to updated that. I note that the old sysctl is not > there...nor is nr_hugepages, for that matter. So maybe I'll just add a > 3rd patch to fix the Documentation? I really just wanted to get the > patches out there as soon as I got them tested... Hrm, nr_hugepages is documented in vm/hugetlbpage.txt and not sysctl/vm.txt Should I document this sysctl there too? Thanks, Nish -- Nishanth Aravamudan IBM Linux Technology Center -- 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: email@kvack.org