On Fri, 2012-06-29 at 20:57 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Fri, 2012-06-29 at 14:46 -0400, Rik van Riel wrote: > > > > I am not convinced all architectures that have CONFIG_NUMA > > need to be a requirement, since some of them (eg. Alpha) > > seem to be lacking a maintainer nowadays. > > Still, this NUMA balancing stuff is not a small tweak to load-balancing. > Its a very significant change is how you schedule. Having such great > differences over architectures isn't something I look forward to. Also, Andrea keeps insisting arch support is trivial, so I don't see the problem. -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href