Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 21 Sep 2006 09:51:00 +0900 | From | KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <> | Subject | Re: [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/
| |