Re: [PATCH 0/6] x86: Reduce Memory Usage and Inter-Node message traffic (v2)

2007-08-27 Thread Mike Travis
On Sat, 25 Aug 2007, Andi Kleen wrote: > On Fri, Aug 24, 2007 at 05:50:18PM -0700, Siddha, Suresh B wrote: > > On Fri, Aug 24, 2007 at 03:26:54PM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > Previous Intro: > > > > Thanks for doing this. > > > > > In x86_64 and i386 architectures most arrays that are

Re: [PATCH 0/6] x86: Reduce Memory Usage and Inter-Node message traffic (v2)

2007-08-27 Thread Mike Travis
On Sat, 25 Aug 2007, Andi Kleen wrote: On Fri, Aug 24, 2007 at 05:50:18PM -0700, Siddha, Suresh B wrote: On Fri, Aug 24, 2007 at 03:26:54PM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Previous Intro: Thanks for doing this. In x86_64 and i386 architectures most arrays that are sized using

Re: [PATCH 0/6] x86: Reduce Memory Usage and Inter-Node message traffic (v2)

2007-08-25 Thread Randy Dunlap
On Sat, 25 Aug 2007 11:24:35 +0200 Andi Kleen wrote: > On Fri, Aug 24, 2007 at 05:50:18PM -0700, Siddha, Suresh B wrote: > > On Fri, Aug 24, 2007 at 03:26:54PM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > Previous Intro: > > > > Thanks for doing this. > > > > > In x86_64 and i386 architectures most

Re: [PATCH 0/6] x86: Reduce Memory Usage and Inter-Node message traffic (v2)

2007-08-25 Thread Andi Kleen
On Fri, Aug 24, 2007 at 05:50:18PM -0700, Siddha, Suresh B wrote: > On Fri, Aug 24, 2007 at 03:26:54PM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > Previous Intro: > > Thanks for doing this. > > > In x86_64 and i386 architectures most arrays that are sized > > using NR_CPUS lay in local memory on node 0.

Re: [PATCH 0/6] x86: Reduce Memory Usage and Inter-Node message traffic (v2)

2007-08-25 Thread Andi Kleen
On Fri, Aug 24, 2007 at 05:50:18PM -0700, Siddha, Suresh B wrote: On Fri, Aug 24, 2007 at 03:26:54PM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Previous Intro: Thanks for doing this. In x86_64 and i386 architectures most arrays that are sized using NR_CPUS lay in local memory on node 0. Not only

Re: [PATCH 0/6] x86: Reduce Memory Usage and Inter-Node message traffic (v2)

2007-08-25 Thread Randy Dunlap
On Sat, 25 Aug 2007 11:24:35 +0200 Andi Kleen wrote: On Fri, Aug 24, 2007 at 05:50:18PM -0700, Siddha, Suresh B wrote: On Fri, Aug 24, 2007 at 03:26:54PM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Previous Intro: Thanks for doing this. In x86_64 and i386 architectures most arrays that are

Re: [PATCH 0/6] x86: Reduce Memory Usage and Inter-Node message traffic (v2)

2007-08-24 Thread Siddha, Suresh B
On Fri, Aug 24, 2007 at 03:26:54PM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Previous Intro: Thanks for doing this. > In x86_64 and i386 architectures most arrays that are sized > using NR_CPUS lay in local memory on node 0. Not only will most > (99%?) of the systems not use all the slots in these

[PATCH 0/6] x86: Reduce Memory Usage and Inter-Node message traffic (v2)

2007-08-24 Thread travis
Changes for version v2: > > Note the addtional change of the cpu_llc_id type from u8 > > to int for ARCH x86_64 to correspond with ARCH i386. > At least currently it cannot be more than 8 bit. So why > waste memory? It would be better to change i386 Done. (x86_64 type => u8). > > Fix four

[PATCH 0/6] x86: Reduce Memory Usage and Inter-Node message traffic (v2)

2007-08-24 Thread travis
Changes for version v2: Note the addtional change of the cpu_llc_id type from u8 to int for ARCH x86_64 to correspond with ARCH i386. At least currently it cannot be more than 8 bit. So why waste memory? It would be better to change i386 Done. (x86_64 type = u8). Fix four instances

Re: [PATCH 0/6] x86: Reduce Memory Usage and Inter-Node message traffic (v2)

2007-08-24 Thread Siddha, Suresh B
On Fri, Aug 24, 2007 at 03:26:54PM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Previous Intro: Thanks for doing this. In x86_64 and i386 architectures most arrays that are sized using NR_CPUS lay in local memory on node 0. Not only will most (99%?) of the systems not use all the slots in these arrays,