From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Subject: Re: [PATCH v4][RFC] hugetlb: add per-node nr_hugepages sysfs attribute From: Lee Schermerhorn In-Reply-To: <20070723122327.3610adf4@schroedinger.engr.sgi.com> References: <20070612001542.GJ14458@us.ibm.com> <20070612034407.GB11773@holomorphy.com> <20070612050910.GU3798@us.ibm.com> <20070612051512.GC11773@holomorphy.com> <20070612174503.GB3798@us.ibm.com> <20070612191347.GE11781@holomorphy.com> <20070613000446.GL3798@us.ibm.com> <20070613152649.GN3798@us.ibm.com> <20070613152847.GO3798@us.ibm.com> <1181759027.6148.77.camel@localhost> <20070613191908.GR3798@us.ibm.com> <1181765111.6148.98.camel@localhost> <20070723122327.3610adf4@schroedinger.engr.sgi.com> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2007 16:14:05 -0400 Message-Id: <1185221645.5074.32.camel@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Christoph Lameter Cc: Nishanth Aravamudan , William Lee Irwin III , anton@samba.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: On Mon, 2007-07-23 at 12:23 -0700, Christoph Lameter wrote: > On Wed, 13 Jun 2007 16:05:10 -0400 > Lee Schermerhorn wrote: > > > I tried to "tighten up" alloc_pages_node() to check the location of > > the first zone in the selected zonelist, as discussed in previous > > exchange. When I do this, I hit a BUG() in slub.c in > > early_kmem_cache_node_alloc(), as it apparently can't handle > > new_slab() returning a NULL page, even tho' it calls it with > > GFP_THISNODE. Slub should be able to handle memoryless nodes, > > right? I'm looking for a work around to this now. > > The memoryless node patchset results in SLUB not attempting to allocate > on memoryless nodes during bootstrap. > Christoph: The message that you're responding to is from 13jun, before your memoryless nodes patch. We discussed it and have more or less resolved it. I was trying to ensure that GFP_THISNODE would fail on my funky interleaved node with just DMA memory, when you ask for a higher zone. I.e., no fallback. You disagreed with this, so I'm waiting for the memoryless nodes patches to get into -mm, so I can address the issue of hugepages [and regular interleaved pages] being allocated from a node where they shouldn't on my platform. This has been discussed in the past week by Nish, Paul Mundt, and others in the -mm thread: [hugetlb] Try to grow pool for MAP_SHARED mappings I think we can handle the fundamental issue [even nodes with memory are not necessarily candidates for interleave, hugepages, ...] by adding another node_state[]. See the mentioned thread. 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