From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1759978AbXGNI2n (ORCPT ); Sat, 14 Jul 2007 04:28:43 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751438AbXGNI2f (ORCPT ); Sat, 14 Jul 2007 04:28:35 -0400 Received: from cantor2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:41962 "EHLO mx2.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750717AbXGNI2e (ORCPT ); Sat, 14 Jul 2007 04:28:34 -0400 Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2007 10:28:07 +0200 From: Nick Piggin To: Mel Gorman Cc: Andrew Morton , kenchen@google.com, jschopp@austin.ibm.com, apw@shadowen.org, kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com, a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl, y-goto@jp.fujitsu.com, clameter@sgi.com, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add a movablecore= parameter for sizing ZONE_MOVABLE Message-ID: <20070714082807.GC1198@wotan.suse.de> References: <20070710102043.GA20303@skynet.ie> <20070712122925.192a6601.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20070712213241.GA7279@skynet.ie> <20070713155610.GD14125@skynet.ie> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20070713155610.GD14125@skynet.ie> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.9i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Jul 13, 2007 at 04:56:10PM +0100, Mel Gorman wrote: > On (12/07/07 22:32), Mel Gorman didst pronounce: > > > > Should we at least go for > > > > > > add-__gfp_movable-for-callers-to-flag-allocations-from-high-memory-that-may-be-migrated.patch > > > create-the-zone_movable-zone.patch > > > allow-huge-page-allocations-to-use-gfp_high_movable.patch > > > handle-kernelcore=-generic.patch > > > > > > in 2.6.23? > > > > Well, yes please from me obviously :) . There is one additional patch > > I would like to send on tomorrow and that is providing the movablecore= > > This is the patch. It has been boot-tested on a number of machines and > behaves as expected. Nick, with this in addition, do you have any > objection to the ZONE_MOVABLE patches going through to 2.6.23? What's the status of making it configurable? I didn't see something in -mm for that yet? But that's not as important as ensuring the concept and user visible stuff is in good shape, which I no longer have any problems with. So yeah I think it would be good to get this in and get people up and running with it.