Messages in this thread | | | From | Rusty Russell <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] 2.5.21 Nonlinear CPU support | Date | Wed, 12 Jun 2002 10:53:20 +1000 |
| |
In message <3D05C27D.186DC066@zip.com.au> you write: > Rusty Russell wrote: > > > > ... > > Let's not perpetuate the myth that everything in the kernel needs to > > be tuned to the last cycle at all costs, hm? > > I was more concerned about the RAM use, actually. > > This patch is an additional reason for CONFIG_NR_CPUS, but I've rather > gone cold on that idea because the "proper fix" is to make all those > huge per-cpu arrays dynamically allocated. So you can run a 64p kernel > on 2p without losing hundreds of k of memory and kernel address space. > > But it looks like all those dynamically-allocated structures would > have to be allocated out to NR_CPUS anyway, to support hotplug, yes? > > In which case, CONFIG_NR_CPUS is the only way to get the memory > back...
Precisely. Previously, the assumption was that if you're SMP, memory is cheap. To be frank, it's still true, but I don't want to discourage any sign of a "small is beautiful" mindset 8)
Rusty. -- Anyone who quotes me in their sig is an idiot. -- Rusty Russell. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |