lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2006]   [Sep]   [20]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [Lhms-devel] [patch00/05]: Containers(V2)- Introduction
On Wed, 20 Sep 2006 16:31:22 -0700 (PDT)
Christoph Lameter <clameter@sgi.com> wrote:

> On Wed, 20 Sep 2006, Rohit Seth wrote:
>
> > Absolutely. Since these containers are not (hard) partitioning the
> > memory in any way so it is easy to change the limits (effectively
> > reducing and increasing the memory limits for tasks belonging to
> > containers). As you said, memory hot-un-plug is important and it is
> > non-trivial amount of work.
>
> Maybe the hotplug guys want to contribute to the discussion?
>
Ah, I'm reading threads with interest.

I think this discussion is about using fake nodes ('struct pgdat')
to divide system's memory into some chunks. Your thought is that
for resizing/adding/removing fake pgdat, memory-hot-plug codes may be useful.
correct ?

Now, memory-hotplug manages all memory by 'section' and allows adding/(removing)
section to pgdat.
Does this section-size handling meet container people's requirement ?
And do we need freeing page when pgdat is removed ?

I think at least SPARSEMEM is useful for fake nodes because 'struct page'
are not tied to pgdat. (DISCONTIGMEM uses node_start_pfn. SPARSEMEM not.)

-Kame

-
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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2006-09-21 02:51    [W:1.432 / U:0.016 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site