lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Sep]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [Approach #2] [RFC][PATCH] Remove cgroup member from struct page
On Wed, 10 Sep 2008 18:47:25 -0700
Balbir Singh <balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:

> KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote:
> > On Wed, 10 Sep 2008 15:56:48 -0700
> > Dave Hansen <dave@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On Wed, 2008-09-10 at 15:36 -0700, Balbir Singh wrote:
> >>> Dave Hansen wrote:
> >>>> On Tue, 2008-09-09 at 18:20 -0700, Balbir Singh wrote:
> >>>>> + start = pgdat->node_start_pfn;
> >>>>> + end = pgdat->node_start_pfn + pgdat->node_spanned_pages;
> >>>>> + size = (end - start) * sizeof(struct page_cgroup);
> >>>>> + printk("Allocating %lu bytes for node %d\n", size, n);
> >>>>> + pcg_map[n] = alloc_bootmem_node(pgdat, size);
> >>>>> + /*
> >>>>> + * We can do smoother recovery
> >>>>> + */
> >>>>> + BUG_ON(!pcg_map[n]);
> >>>>> + return 0;
> >>>>> }
> >>>> This will really suck for sparse memory machines. Imagine a machine
> >>>> with 1GB of memory at 0x0 and another 1GB of memory at 1TB up in the
> >>>> address space.
> >>>>
> >>> I would hate to re-implement the entire sparsemem code :(
> >>> Kame did suggest making the memory controller depend on sparsemem (to hook in
> >>> from there for allocations)
> >> Yeah, you could just make another mem_section member. Or, you could
> >> work to abstract the sparsemem code so that other people can use it, or
> >> maybe make it more dynamic so we can have multiple pfn->object lookups
> >> in parallel. Adding the struct member is obviously easier.
> >>
> > Don't worry. I'll care sparse memory map and hotplug.
> > But whether making this depends on SPARSEMEM or not is not fixed yet.
> > I'll try generic one, at first. If it's dirty, start discussion about SPARSEMEM.
> >
> > (Honestly, I love sparsemem than others ;)
>
> My concern is that if we depend on sparsemem, then we force distros to turn on
> sparsemem (which might be the default, but not on all architectures), we might
> end up losing those architectures (w.r.t. turning on the memory controller)
> where sparsemem is not the default on the distro.
>
Yes. I share your concern. Then, I'll try not-on-sparsemem version, at first.

Thanks,
-Kame



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2008-09-11 03:57    [W:0.095 / U:0.124 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site