On Fri, Mar 03, 2006 at 01:52:56PM -0800, Luck, Tony wrote: > Any ideas on the relative proportions of nodes with/without memory? > Should we consider renaming "for_each_node()" as "for_each_mnode()" > (meaning only scan nodes with memory). That would stop mm/slab.c > from allocating useless arraycaches for nodes with no memory. But > this is turning into a discussion that would have to happen on LKML. Memory nodes are far more prevalent than IO nodes. I don't think it is worth changing this, at least not at this time. > > Perhaps you could add an /*ACPI3.0-FIXME*/ comment (or some such) > to the loop in Dean's patch as a reminder to fix this later? That > might also serve as a clue to any janitor that tries to clean > up this code back to using "for_each_node()" (and a reminder to > me to not take such a patch). I'll add a comment and send out a new patch in a few minutes. Thanks, Dean - : send the line "unsubscribe linux-ia64" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
|