From: "Martin J. Bligh" <mbligh@aracnet.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>, David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
Cc: torvalds@osdl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Andy Whitcroft <apw@shadowen.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Permit inode & dentry hash tables to be allocated > MAX_ORDER size
Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2004 16:03:25 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3066250000.1086995005@flay> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20040611150419.11281555.akpm@osdl.org>
>> (2) Changing MAX_ORDER appears to have a number of effects beyond just
>> limiting the maximum size that can be allocated in one go.
>
> Several architectures implement CONFIG_FORCE_MAX_ZONEORDER and I haven't
> heard of larger MAX_ORDERs causing problems.
>
> Certainly, increasing MAX_ORDER is the simplest solution to the problems
> which you identify so we need to substantiate these "number of effects"
> much more than this please.
We've hit a problem with alignment issues where the start of the zone is
aligned to 16MB, for instance, and the max grouping is now 256MB. That
generatates a "warning: wrong zone alignment: it will crash" error (or
something similar). Andy sent me a patch this morning to throw away
the lower section, which is much nicer than crashing ... but I'd prefer
not to throw that RAM away unless we have to.
Allocating the big-assed hashes out of bootmem seems much cleaner to me,
at least ...
M.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-06-11 23:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-06-11 10:44 [PATCH] Permit inode & dentry hash tables to be allocated > MAX_ORDER size David Howells
2004-06-11 10:48 ` Andrew Morton
2004-06-11 11:12 ` David Howells
2004-06-11 22:04 ` Andrew Morton
2004-06-11 23:03 ` Martin J. Bligh [this message]
2004-06-11 23:19 ` Andrew Morton
2004-06-11 23:18 ` Martin J. Bligh
2004-06-11 23:30 ` Andrew Morton
2004-06-12 12:45 ` Andy Whitcroft
2004-06-13 16:09 ` Linus Torvalds
2004-06-11 14:21 ` [PATCH] Permit inode & dentry hash tables to be allocated > MAX_ORDER size [#2] David Howells
2004-06-11 22:01 ` Andrew Morton
2004-06-14 10:47 ` [PATCH] Permit inode & dentry hash tables to be allocated > MAX_ORDER size [try #3] David Howells
2004-06-14 11:04 ` Andrew Morton
2004-06-14 11:41 ` David Howells
[not found] <263jX-5RZ-19@gated-at.bofh.it>
[not found] ` <262nZ-56Z-5@gated-at.bofh.it>
[not found] ` <263jX-5RZ-17@gated-at.bofh.it>
2004-06-12 0:21 ` [PATCH] Permit inode & dentry hash tables to be allocated > MAX_ORDER size Andi Kleen
2004-06-12 6:00 ` Martin J. Bligh
2004-06-12 7:36 ` Dave Hansen
2004-06-12 13:11 ` Andi Kleen
2004-06-12 15:00 ` Martin J. Bligh
2004-06-15 16:40 ` Dave Hansen
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=3066250000.1086995005@flay \
--to=mbligh@aracnet.com \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=apw@shadowen.org \
--cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=torvalds@osdl.org \
/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