Re: free bootmem feedback patch

From: Josh Aas <>
Date: 2004-08-07 00:11:50
Attached is an improved version of Tony Luck's patch. It shaves another 
~25% off by not using atomic ops to clear the page reserved bits and 
prefetching. Tony - will you sign off on it with me and we'll get this in?

Unfortunately, this still leaves a ~1 minute delay with no indication of 
what is going on for 4TB machines, and ~2 minutes for 8TB. Thus, I'd 
still like to see my progrees indicator patch go in. I am guessing 
memory sizes are only going to get bigger than even 8 TB, and memory is 
not going to get faster at the rate the totals increase (it certainly 
didn't double in speed between 4 and 8 TB installations). Thoughts?

Signed-off-by: Josh Aas <>


William Lee Irwin III wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 03, 2004 at 12:53:53PM -0500, Josh Aas wrote:
>>Are there any outstanding issues with Tony's second revision of the 
>>free_all_bootmem_core function? Do we still have the problem of making 
>>sure longwork in node_bootmem_map[] corresponds to an order 6 page with 
>>the right physical alignment? The second revision looks good to me. If I 
>>could get some more feedback on it I'll clean up any remaining issues so 
>>it can land sometime soon. I'll post test results (unpatched vs. 
>>patched) on a big machine later this afternoon.
> I think it's fine.
> On Tue, Aug 03, 2004 at 12:53:53PM -0500, Josh Aas wrote:
>>wli - do you still want to see the memory map for my big test machine 
>>(512GB RAM)?
> Sure.
> -- wli

Josh Aas
Silicon Graphics, Inc. (SGI)
Linux System Software

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ia64" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at

Received on Fri Aug 6 10:14:26 2004

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 2005-08-02 09:20:29 EST