Hi Tony, On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 11:44:32PM +0000, Luck, Tony wrote: >>>Sorry, I have no meaningful progress on this. Splitting hugepages is not >>>a trivial operation, and introduce more complexity on hugetlbfs code. >>>I don't hit on any usecase of it rather than memory failure, so I'm not >>>sure that it's worth doing now. >> >> Agreed. ;-) > >Agreed that huge pages should be split - or that it is not worth splitting them? > Split hugepages will introduce more complexity and there is no other potential users currently as mentioned by Naoya. This patch should be applied as a work around before hugetlbfs support splitting. >Actually I wonder how useful huge pages still are - transparent huge pages may >give most of the benefits without having to modify applications to use them. >Plus the kernel does know how to split them when an error occurs (which I care >about more than most people). Transparent huge pages are not helpful for DB workload which there is a lot of shared memory, however, transparent huge pages just doing process local memory allocation. Regards, Wanpeng Li > >-Tony -- 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>