Re: [Lhms-devel] Re: [RFC] buddy allocator without bitmap [3/4]

From: Hiroyuki KAMEZAWA
Date: Thu Aug 26 2004 - 19:49:23 EST


Dave Hansen wrote:
>>1. Now, I think some small parts, some essence of mem_section which
>> makes pfn_valid() faster may be good.
>
>
> The only question is what it will take when there's a partially populate
> mem_section. We'll almost certainly have to allow it, but the real
> question is whether or not we will ever have a partially populated one
> that's not at the end of memory.
>
Hmm....I cannot answer it fully.

My tiger4 (Itanium x 2) shows aligned_order=0, because it has a mem_map
start with address 0x????????3(I forget now), odd number ;(.
I like a mechine in which all memory are aligned.....

>>And another way,
>>
>>2. A method which enables page -> page's max_order calculation
>> may be good and consistent way in this no-bitmap approach.
>>
>>But this problem would be my week-end homework :).
>
>
> Instead of adding more stuff to the mem_section, we might be able to
> (ab)use more stuff in the mem_map's mem_map, like I am with
> page->section right now.

I wonder if there is another way which doesn't increase memory usage
in boottime, it will be better.
I'll going on considering the way to fix nr_mem_map things.

Thanks
-- Kame


--
--the clue is these footmarks leading to the door.--
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/