From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Sat, 24 May 2008 00:45:49 +0200 From: Nick Piggin Subject: Re: [patch 13/18] hugetlb: support boot allocate different sizes Message-ID: <20080523224549.GA3144@wotan.suse.de> References: <20080423015302.745723000@nick.local0.net> <20080423015431.027712000@nick.local0.net> <20080425184041.GH9680@us.ibm.com> <20080523053641.GM13071@wotan.suse.de> <20080523060438.GC4520@wotan.suse.de> <20080523203228.GC23924@us.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20080523203228.GC23924@us.ibm.com> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Nishanth Aravamudan Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, andi@firstfloor.org, kniht@linux.vnet.ibm.com, abh@cray.com, wli@holomorphy.com List-ID: On Fri, May 23, 2008 at 01:32:28PM -0700, Nishanth Aravamudan wrote: > On 23.05.2008 [08:04:39 +0200], Nick Piggin wrote: > > On Fri, May 23, 2008 at 07:36:41AM +0200, Nick Piggin wrote: > > > On Fri, Apr 25, 2008 at 11:40:41AM -0700, Nishanth Aravamudan wrote: > > > > > > > > So, you made max_huge_pages an array of the same size as the hstates > > > > array, right? > > > > > > > > So why can't we directly use h->max_huge_pagees everywhere, and *only* > > > > touch max_huge_pages in the sysctl path. > > > > > > It's just to bring up the max_huge_pages array initially for the > > > sysctl read path. I guess the array could be built every time the > > > sysctl handler runs as another option... that might hide away a > > > bit of the ugliness into the sysctl code I suppose. I'll see how > > > it looks. > > > > Hmm, I think we could get into problems with the issue of kernel > > parameter passing vs hstate setup, so things might get a bit fragile. > > I think it is robust at this point in time to retain the > > max_huge_pages array if the hugetlb vs arch hstate registration setup > > gets revamped, it might be something to look at, but I prefer to keep > > it rather than tinker at this point. > > Sure and that's fair. > > But I'm approaching it from the perspective that the multi-valued > sysctl will go away with the sysfs interface. So perhaps I'll do a > cleanup then. Yes, that could be one good way to keep the proc API unchanged -- move it over to sysfs and just put a "default" hugepagesz in proc. -- 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