On 09/22/2012 03:31 PM, Sasha Levin wrote:

On 09/21/2012 09:14 PM, Dan Magenheimer wrote:

quoted

quoted

quoted

+#define MAX_CLIENTS 16

Seems a bit arbitrary. Why 16?

Sasha Levin posted a patch to fix this but it was tied in to
the proposed KVM implementation, so was never merged.

My patch changed the max pools per client, not the maximum amount of clients.
That patch has already found it's way in.

(MAX_CLIENTS does look like an arbitrary number though).

btw, while we're on the subject of KVM, the implementation of tmem/kvm was
blocked due to insufficient performance caused by the lack of multi-page
ops/batching.

Are there any plans to make it better in the future?


Thanks,
Sasha

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>