From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: by ug-out-1314.google.com with SMTP id m2so176635uge for ; Tue, 26 Jun 2007 12:17:05 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <29495f1d0706261217y3ba48400q7c64865082ba13df@mail.gmail.com> Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2007 12:17:05 -0700 From: "Nish Aravamudan" Subject: Re: [PATCH] slob: poor man's NUMA support. In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <20070619090616.GA23697@linux-sh.org> <20070626002131.ff3518d4.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <29495f1d0706261204x5b49511co18546443c78033fd@mail.gmail.com> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Christoph Lameter Cc: Andrew Morton , Paul Mundt , Matt Mackall , Nick Piggin , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 6/26/07, Christoph Lameter wrote: > On Tue, 26 Jun 2007, Nish Aravamudan wrote: > > > > No. alloc_pages follows memory policy. alloc_pages_node does not. One of > > > the reasons that I want a new memory policy layer are these kinds of > > > strange uses. > > > > What would break by changing, in alloc_pages_node() > > > > if (nid < 0) > > nid = numa_node_id(); > > > > to > > > > if (nid < 0) > > return alloc_pages_current(gfp_mask, order); > > > > beyond needing to make alloc_pages_current() defined if !NUMA too. > > It would make alloc_pages_node obey memory policies instead of only > following cpuset constraints. An a memory policy may redirect the > allocation from the local node ;-). heh, true true. Hrm, I guess the simplest looking solution is rarely the best. Could we add more smarts in alloc_pages_current() to make GFP_THISNODE be equivalent to bind_zonelist(thisnode_only_mask)? I'll keep thinking, maybe I'll come up with something. Thanks, Nish -- 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