On (06/08/07 22:31), Andi Kleen didst pronounce: > > > If correct, I would suggest merging the horrible hack for .23 then taking > > it out when we merge "grouping pages by mobility". But what if we don't do > > that merge? > > Or disable ZONE_MOVABLE until it is usable?
It's usable now. The issue with policies only occurs if the user specifies kernelcore= or movablecore= on the command-line. Your language suggests that you believe policies are not applied when ZONE_MOVABLE is configured at build-time. > I don't think we have the > infrastructure to really use it anyways, so it shouldn't make too much > difference > in terms of features. And it's not that there is some sort of deadline > around for it. > > Or mark it CONFIG_EXPERIMENTAL with a warning that it'll break NUMA. But > disabling > is probably better. > Saying it breaks NUMA is a excessively strong language. It doesn't break policies in that they still get applied to the highest zone. If kernelcore= or movablecore= is not specified, the behaviour doesn't change. > Then for .24 or .25 a better solution can be developed. > The better solution in my mind is to always filter the zonelist instead of applying them only for MPOL_BIND zonelists as the hack does. > I would prefer that instead of merging bandaid horrible hacks -- they have > a tendency to stay around. -- Mel Gorman Part-time Phd Student Linux Technology Center University of Limerick IBM Dublin Software Lab - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
