On Mon, Jun 25, 2007 at 04:17:56PM +1000, Nick Piggin wrote: > Paul Mundt wrote: > >This adds preliminary NUMA support to SLOB, primarily aimed at systems > >with small nodes (tested all the way down to a 128kB SRAM block), whether > >asymmetric or otherwise. > > Fine by me as well, FWIW. My points about per-cpu/node queues were not > to say that I'm really opposed to getting this in first. In a way, you > sell yourself short with the patch name: the implementation may be just > a basic one, but simplicity is a key point of SLOB... Adding numa > awareness to the slob APIs is obviously a key step and makes it much > easier to experiment with enhancements to the implementation. > > Unless it has been picked up already, I'd call it "initial NUMA support" > ;) Thanks! Would be great to hear about your experiences using SLOB as > well -- how much memory you're saving, how it performs, etc.
I haven't seen the usual echo from Andrew, so I think Paul should resend it with three Acked-bys. -- Mathematics is the supreme nostalgia of our time. - 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/
