From: Andrea Arcangeli <andrea@novell.com>
To: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
Cc: Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: lowmem_reserve (replaces protection)
Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 03:10:43 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20041027011043.GQ14325@dualathlon.random> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0410262059020.21548-100000@chimarrao.boston.redhat.com>
On Tue, Oct 26, 2004 at 09:00:11PM -0400, Rik van Riel wrote:
> However, doesn't the protection also serve a purpose for
> NUMA fallback ? How is that handled by your code ?
It doesn't.
The only reason any NUMA folk were interested in this stuff was to nuke
the incremental min weak band-aid that Linus introduced in 2.4 while
rejecting my real lowmem_reserve algorithm (that has been reinvented in
2.6.5 first and against 2.6.7 with the name of protection but still
buggy and disabled by default, so not very useful.., especially after
even the incremental-min was gone from 2.6.8+).
NUMA folks only want to nuke the incremental-min hack since that
escalated to huge waste of ram on the hundred nodes.
the major point of the rework in the protection algorithm happened
between 2.6.5 and 2.6.8 was to drop any NUMA effect from the algorithm
that guarantees DMA allocations on x86-64 and NORMAL allocations on x86
PAE. So being it unrelated to NUMA is a feature as far as I can tell.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-10-27 1:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-10-25 17:01 lowmem_reserve (replaces protection) Andrea Arcangeli
2004-10-26 1:48 ` Rik van Riel
2004-10-26 1:58 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2004-10-26 3:48 ` Nick Piggin
2004-10-26 4:04 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2004-10-26 4:17 ` Nick Piggin
2004-10-27 0:25 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2004-10-27 0:42 ` Andrew Morton
2004-10-27 0:48 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2004-10-27 2:06 ` Nick Piggin
2004-10-28 0:26 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2004-10-27 0:31 ` Rik van Riel
2004-10-27 0:54 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2004-10-27 0:56 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2004-10-27 1:35 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2004-10-27 2:08 ` Andrew Morton
2004-10-27 2:31 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2004-10-27 2:56 ` Nick Piggin
2004-10-27 1:00 ` Rik van Riel
2004-10-27 1:10 ` Andrea Arcangeli [this message]
2004-10-27 2:05 ` Nick Piggin
2004-10-27 2:29 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2004-10-27 3:01 ` Nick Piggin
2004-10-27 3:23 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2004-10-27 3:34 ` Nick Piggin
2004-10-27 3:43 ` Andrew Morton
2004-10-27 4:44 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2004-10-27 4:51 ` Rik van Riel
2004-10-27 5:05 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2004-10-27 5:50 ` Nick Piggin
2004-10-27 5:33 ` Andrew Morton
2004-10-27 6:11 ` Andrea Arcangeli
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20041027011043.GQ14325@dualathlon.random \
--to=andrea@novell.com \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au \
--cc=riel@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox