On 12/20/2012 03:28 PM, David Rientjes wrote: > On Wed, 19 Dec 2012, Sasha Levin wrote: > >> 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. >> > > If a distro releases with CONFIG_TRANSPARNET_HUGEPAGE=y and a user is > running on a processor that does not support pse then this just cost them > 8KB for no reason. The overhead by simply enabling > CONFIG_TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE is worse in this scenario, but this is whole > reason for having the dynamic allocation in the original code. If there's > a compelling reason for why we want this change, then that fact should at > least be documented. > > Could you propose a v2 that includes fixes for the other problems that > were mentioned? > Sure, will do. 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>