From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix hugetlb pool allocation with empty nodes - V2 -> V3 From: Lee Schermerhorn In-Reply-To: <29495f1d0705161027v2b79ef5as394dbbef8d7eec0@mail.gmail.com> References: <20070503022107.GA13592@kryten> <1178310543.5236.43.camel@localhost> <1178728661.5047.64.camel@localhost> <1178738245.5047.67.camel@localhost> <29495f1d0705161027v2b79ef5as394dbbef8d7eec0@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Wed, 16 May 2007 16:01:36 -0400 Message-Id: <1179345696.5867.35.camel@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Nish Aravamudan Cc: Christoph Lameter , Anton Blanchard , linux-mm@kvack.org, ak@suse.de, mel@csn.ul.ie, apw@shadowen.org, Andrew Morton , Eric Whitney List-ID: On Wed, 2007-05-16 at 10:27 -0700, Nish Aravamudan wrote: > On 5/9/07, Lee Schermerhorn wrote: > > On Wed, 2007-05-09 at 09:57 -0700, Christoph Lameter wrote: > > > On Wed, 9 May 2007, Lee Schermerhorn wrote: > > > > > > > + HUGETLB_PAGE_ORDER); > > > > + > > > > + nid = next_node(nid, node_online_map); > > > > + if (nid == MAX_NUMNODES) > > > > + nid = first_node(node_online_map); > > > > > > Maybe use nr_node_ids here? May save some scanning over online maps? > > > > Good idea. I won't get to it until next week. Maybe we'll have more > > comments by then. > > > > Anton: anything to add? > > Actually, I was going to ask? Why don't we just iterate over > node_populated_map? You've exported it and everything... Rather than > going over some other map and then checking to see if the node is > populated every time? > Uh... tunnel vision? I'm testing a reworked patch, against 2.6.22-rc1-mm1. Will post shortly, I hope. Lee -- 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: email@kvack.org