From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Fri, 28 Mar 2003 02:46:41 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Fri, 28 Mar 2003 02:46:41 -0500 Received: from holomorphy.com ([66.224.33.161]:31150 "EHLO holomorphy") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Fri, 28 Mar 2003 02:46:40 -0500 Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2003 23:57:30 -0800 From: William Lee Irwin III To: Zwane Mwaikambo Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: 64GB NUMA-Q after pgcl Message-ID: <20030328075730.GP30140@holomorphy.com> Mail-Followup-To: William Lee Irwin III , Zwane Mwaikambo , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <20030328040038.GO1350@holomorphy.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.28i Organization: The Domain of Holomorphy Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Mar 28, 2003 at 02:45:30AM -0500, Zwane Mwaikambo wrote: > before: > Memory: 65306956k/67100672k available (1724k kernel code, 98252k reserved, 781k data, 284k init, 65134592k highmem) > after: > Memory: 65946144k/67100672k available (1956k kernel code, 15936k reserved, 667k data, 300k init, 65198080k highmem) > Would you mind explaining the details as to what would cause that > discrepancy in reserved memory size? Sure. On NUMA-Q mem_map[] is not allocated using bootmem except for node 0. Various other bootmem allocations are also proportional to memory as measured in units of PAGE_SIZE, but not all. So all we're seeing here is node 0's mem_map[] with "miscellaneous" bootmem allocations thrown in, whether reduced or increased. This is not very reflective of what's going on as the majority of mem_map[] is allocated through a custom reservation mechanism as opposed to bootmem. -- wli