Re: [patch] mm: Reimplementation of dynamic percpu memory allocator

2005-01-17 Thread Ravikiran G Thirumalai
On Mon, Jan 17, 2005 at 02:11:17PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > Ravikiran G Thirumalai <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > So... is it not possible to enhance vmalloc() for node-awareness, then > > > just use it? > > > > > > > Memory for block management (free lists, bufctl lists) is also

Re: [patch] mm: Reimplementation of dynamic percpu memory allocator

2005-01-17 Thread Andrew Morton
Ravikiran G Thirumalai <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > So... is it not possible to enhance vmalloc() for node-awareness, then > > just use it? > > > > Memory for block management (free lists, bufctl lists) is also resident > in one block. A typical block in this allocator looks like this

Re: [patch] mm: Reimplementation of dynamic percpu memory allocator

2005-01-17 Thread Ravikiran G Thirumalai
On Fri, Jan 14, 2005 at 01:34:25AM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > Ravikiran G Thirumalai <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > Why cannot the code simply call vmalloc rather than copying its > > internals? > > > > Node local allocation. vmalloc cannot ensure pages for correspomding > > cp