From: Christoph Lameter <clameter@sgi.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Avoid allocating during interleave from almost full nodes
Date: Mon, 6 Nov 2006 13:42:56 -0800 (PST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0611061334380.30192@schroedinger.engr.sgi.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20061106132029.28cd88b5.akpm@osdl.org>
On Mon, 6 Nov 2006, Andrew Morton wrote:
> But doesn't this patch introduce considerable risks of the above problems
> occurring? In the two-nodes-have-lots-of-free-memory scenario?
If two nodes have lots of memory then we will alternate between both
nodes. If one of the nodes is going below the interleave limit then we
will indeed only allocate from that single node. At some point both are
dropping below the limit and we will revert back to alternating.
We can avoid the phase where we only allocate from one node by checking
the node weight of the available nodes instead of checking for an empty
node mask.
For systems with less than 3 nodes the approach will not be useful. What I
had in mind when writing this patch were systems with a large number of
nodes segmented by cpusets into smaller slices. The segments would
still be greater than 4 nodes.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-11-06 21:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-11-03 20:58 Christoph Lameter
2006-11-03 21:46 ` Andrew Morton
2006-11-03 22:10 ` Christoph Lameter
2006-11-03 22:31 ` Andrew Morton
2006-11-04 0:28 ` Christoph Lameter
2006-11-04 0:58 ` Andrew Morton
2006-11-06 16:53 ` Christoph Lameter
2006-11-06 19:59 ` Andrew Morton
2006-11-06 20:12 ` Christoph Lameter
2006-11-06 20:24 ` Andrew Morton
2006-11-06 20:31 ` Christoph Lameter
2006-11-06 20:42 ` Andrew Morton
2006-11-06 20:58 ` Christoph Lameter
2006-11-06 21:20 ` Andrew Morton
2006-11-06 21:42 ` Christoph Lameter [this message]
2006-11-04 1:26 ` Paul Jackson
2006-11-04 1:42 ` Andrew Morton
2006-11-04 10:51 ` Paul Jackson
2006-11-06 16:56 ` Christoph Lameter
2006-11-08 10:21 ` Paul Jackson
2006-11-08 15:18 ` Peter Zijlstra
2006-11-08 17:06 ` Paul Jackson
2006-11-08 17:09 ` Peter Zijlstra
2006-11-08 17:21 ` Paul Jackson
2006-11-08 17:40 ` Christoph Lameter
2006-12-01 7:51 ` Paul Jackson
2006-12-01 7:59 ` Andrew Morton
2006-12-01 16:27 ` Christoph Lameter
2006-11-04 10:35 ` CTL_UNNUMBERED and killing sys_sysctl Eric W. Biederman
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=Pine.LNX.4.64.0611061334380.30192@schroedinger.engr.sgi.com \
--to=clameter@sgi.com \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®