From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/2][UPDATED] hugetlb: search harder for memory in alloc_fresh_huge_page() From: Lee Schermerhorn In-Reply-To: References: <20070807171432.GY15714@us.ibm.com> <1186517722.5067.31.camel@localhost> <20070807221240.GB15714@us.ibm.com> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Wed, 08 Aug 2007 09:17:28 -0400 Message-Id: <1186579048.5055.5.camel@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Christoph Lameter Cc: Nishanth Aravamudan , anton@samba.org, wli@holomorphy.com, linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: On Tue, 2007-08-07 at 15:54 -0700, Christoph Lameter wrote: > On Tue, 7 Aug 2007, Nishanth Aravamudan wrote: > > > > > > > Not that I don't trust __GFP_THISNODE, but may I suggest a > > > "VM_BUG_ON(page_to_nid(page) != nid)" -- up above the spin_lock(), of > > > course. Better yet, add the assertion and drop this one line change? > > Dont do this change. [being equally terse] Why? -- 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