From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261624AbVAGAOH (ORCPT ); Thu, 6 Jan 2005 19:14:07 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261692AbVAGAFJ (ORCPT ); Thu, 6 Jan 2005 19:05:09 -0500 Received: from holomorphy.com ([207.189.100.168]:41921 "EHLO holomorphy.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S263124AbVAFX7E (ORCPT ); Thu, 6 Jan 2005 18:59:04 -0500 Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2005 15:58:30 -0800 From: William Lee Irwin III To: Steve Longerbeam Cc: Andi Kleen , Hugh Dickins , Ray Bryant , Hirokazu Takahashi , Dave Hansen , Marcello Tosatti , Kernel Mailing List , linux-mm , andrew morton Subject: Re: page migration patchset Message-ID: <20050106235830.GE9636@holomorphy.com> References: <41DC7EAD.8010407@mvista.com> <20050106144307.GB59451@muc.de> <41DDCD2B.4060709@mvista.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <41DDCD2B.4060709@mvista.com> Organization: The Domain of Holomorphy User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6+20040722i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Andi Kleen wrote: >> You need lazy hugetlbfs to use it (= allocate at page fault time, >> not mmap time). Otherwise the policy can never be applied. I implemented >> my own version of lazy allocation for SLES9, but when I wanted to >> merge it into mainline some other people told they had a much better >> singing&dancing lazy hugetlb patch. So I waited for them, but they >> never went forward with their stuff and their code seems to be dead >> now. So this is still a dangling end :/ >> If nothing happens soon regarding the "other" hugetlb code I will >> forward port my SLES9 code. It already has NUMA policy support. >> For now you can remove the hugetlb policy code from mainline if you >> want, it would be easy to readd it when lazy hugetlbfs is merged. On Thu, Jan 06, 2005 at 03:43:39PM -0800, Steve Longerbeam wrote: > if you don't mind I'd like to. Sounds as if lazy hugetlbfs would be > able to make use of the generic file mapping->policy instead of a > hugetlb-specific policy anyway. Same goes for shmem. If Andi's comments refer to my work, it already got permavetoed. Anyway, using the vma's is a minor change. Please include this as a patch separate from other changes (fault handling, consolidations, etc.) -- wli