From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261614AbULNSzP (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 Dec 2004 13:55:15 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261613AbULNSzP (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 Dec 2004 13:55:15 -0500 Received: from e32.co.us.ibm.com ([32.97.110.130]:2027 "EHLO e32.co.us.ibm.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261608AbULNSzJ (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 Dec 2004 13:55:09 -0500 Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 10:59:50 -0800 From: "Martin J. Bligh" To: Brent Casavant , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org cc: linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org, ak@suse.de Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] NUMA boot hash allocation interleaving Message-ID: <9250000.1103050790@flay> In-Reply-To: References: X-Mailer: Mulberry/2.1.2 (Linux/x86) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > NUMA systems running current Linux kernels suffer from substantial > inequities in the amount of memory allocated from each NUMA node > during boot. In particular, several large hashes are allocated > using alloc_bootmem, and as such are allocated contiguously from > a single node each. Yup, makes a lot of sense to me to stripe these, for the caches that are global (ie inodes, dentries, etc). Only question I'd have is didn't Manfred or someone (Andi?) do this before? Or did that never get accepted? I know we talked about it a while back. M,