From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1161215AbWFVTt7 (ORCPT ); Thu, 22 Jun 2006 15:49:59 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1161213AbWFVTt7 (ORCPT ); Thu, 22 Jun 2006 15:49:59 -0400 Received: from omx1-ext.sgi.com ([192.48.179.11]:36793 "EHLO omx1.americas.sgi.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1161215AbWFVTt5 (ORCPT ); Thu, 22 Jun 2006 15:49:57 -0400 Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2006 12:49:46 -0700 (PDT) From: Christoph Lameter To: Pekka J Enberg cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Marcelo Tosatti , "Paul E. McKenney" , Nick Piggin , Theodore Tso , Dave Chinner , Andi Kleen Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] Slab Reclaim logic In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: <20060619184651.23130.62875.sendpatchset@schroedinger.engr.sgi.com> <20060619184712.23130.65271.sendpatchset@schroedinger.engr.sgi.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 22 Jun 2006, Pekka J Enberg wrote: > Not everyone is IA-64. The slab allocator is already pretty memory > hungry so lets try not to make it any worse, ok? We have a huge memory problem with reclain. This is only a small sacrifice. Moreover even on 32 bit platforms this will not be significant for most caches that are cache aligned.