On 12/19/2012 05:26 PM, David Rientjes wrote: > This used to be dynamically allocated and would save the 8KB that you > statically allocate if transparent hugepages cannot be used. The generic > hashtable implementation does not support dynamic allocation? No, currently the hashtable only handles statically allocated hashtables. In this case, the downside is that you'll waste 8KB if hugepages aren't available, but the upside is that you'll have one less dereference when accessing the hashtable. If the 8KB saving is preferable here I'll drop the patch and come back when dynamic hashtable is supported. Thanks, Sasha -- 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=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>