From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail202.messagelabs.com (mail202.messagelabs.com [216.82.254.227]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B8CB6900114 for ; Thu, 5 May 2011 15:46:00 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 5 May 2011 12:45:56 -0700 From: Andrew Morton Subject: Re: [PATCH] cpumask: alloc_cpumask_var() use NUMA_NO_NODE Message-Id: <20110505124556.3c8a7e5b.akpm@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: <20110428231856.3D54.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com> References: <20110428231856.3D54.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: KOSAKI Motohiro Cc: LKML , linux-mm@kvack.org On Thu, 28 Apr 2011 23:17:15 +0900 (JST) KOSAKI Motohiro wrote: > NUMA_NO_NODE and numa_node_id() are different meanings. NUMA_NO_NODE > is obviously recomended fallback. > > Signed-off-by: KOSAKI Motohiro > --- > lib/cpumask.c | 2 +- > 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/lib/cpumask.c b/lib/cpumask.c > index 4f6425d..af3e581 100644 > --- a/lib/cpumask.c > +++ b/lib/cpumask.c > @@ -131,7 +131,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(zalloc_cpumask_var_node); > */ > bool alloc_cpumask_var(cpumask_var_t *mask, gfp_t flags) > { > - return alloc_cpumask_var_node(mask, flags, numa_node_id()); > + return alloc_cpumask_var_node(mask, flags, NUMA_NO_NODE); > } > EXPORT_SYMBOL(alloc_cpumask_var); > So effectively this will replace numa_node_id() with numa_mem_id(), yes? What runtime effects might this have? -- 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/ . Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/ Don't email: email@kvack.org