[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: large page patch
- To: "'David S. Miller'" <davem@redhat.com>, akpm@zip.com.au
- Subject: RE: large page patch
- From: "Seth, Rohit" <rohit.seth@intel.com>
- Date: Thu, 1 Aug 2002 18:34:04 -0700
- Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,"Seth, Rohit" <rohit.seth@intel.com>,"Saxena, Sunil" <sunil.saxena@intel.com>,"Mallick, Asit K" <asit.k.mallick@intel.com>
- Fake-Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org
- Original-Recipient: rfc822;linux-mm-archive@humbolt.geo.uu.nl
- Sender: Rik van Riel <riel@nl.linux.org>
There is typo in Andrew's mail. It is not 256K, but it is 256MB.
-----Original Message-----
From: David S. Miller [mailto:davem@redhat.com]
Sent: Thursday, August 01, 2002 6:20 PM
To: akpm@zip.com.au
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; linux-mm@kvack.org;
rohit.seth@intel.com; sunil.saxena@intel.com; asit.k.mallick@intel.com
Subject: Re: large page patch
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@zip.com.au>
Date: Thu, 01 Aug 2002 18:26:40 -0700
"David S. Miller" wrote:
> This is probably done to increase the likelyhood that 4MB page orders
> are available. If we collapse 4MB pages deeper, they are less likely
> to be broken up because smaller orders would be selected first.
This is leakage from ia64, which supports up to 256k pages.
Ummm, 4MB > 256K and even with a 4K PAGE_SIZE MAX_ORDER coalesces
up to 4MB already :-)
Apparently a page-table based representation could not be used by PPC.
The page-table is just an abstraction, there is no reason dummy
"large" ptes could not be used which are just ignored by the HW TLB
reload code.
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/