Re: [PATCH] slob: poor man's NUMA support.

Matt Mackall
2007-06-25T06:20:59Z

On Mon, Jun 25, 2007 at 04:17:56PM +1000, Nick Piggin wrote:
> Paul Mundt wrote:
> >This adds preliminary NUMA support to SLOB, primarily aimed at systems
> >with small nodes (tested all the way down to a 128kB SRAM block), whether
> >asymmetric or otherwise.
>
> Fine by me as well, FWIW. My points about per-cpu/node queues were not
> to say that I'm really opposed to getting this in first. In a way, you
> sell yourself short with the patch name: the implementation may be just
> a basic one, but simplicity is a key point of SLOB... Adding numa
> awareness to the slob APIs is obviously a key step and makes it much
> easier to experiment with enhancements to the implementation.
>
> Unless it has been picked up already, I'd call it "initial NUMA support"
> ;) Thanks! Would be great to hear about your experiences using SLOB as
> well -- how much memory you're saving, how it performs, etc.

I haven't seen the usual echo from Andrew, so I think Paul should
resend it with three Acked-bys.

--
Mathematics is the supreme nostalgia of our time.