From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2007 20:19:24 -0700 (PDT) From: Christoph Lameter Subject: Re: [PATCH v6][RFC] Fix hugetlb pool allocation with empty nodes In-Reply-To: <20070612031718.GP3798@us.ibm.com> Message-ID: References: <20070611230829.GC14458@us.ibm.com> <20070611231008.GD14458@us.ibm.com> <20070612001542.GJ14458@us.ibm.com> <20070612021245.GH3798@us.ibm.com> <20070612023421.GL3798@us.ibm.com> <20070612031718.GP3798@us.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Nishanth Aravamudan Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: On Mon, 11 Jun 2007, Nishanth Aravamudan wrote: > > Ahh did not see that. Can you not call simply into interleave() from > > mempolicy.c? It will get you the counter that you need. > > You just told me that mempolicy.c is built conditionally on NUMA. > alloc_fresh_huge_page() is not, it only depeonds on CONFIG_HUGETLB_PAGE! Well you just need to have the appropriate fallbacks defined in mempolicy.h > The only interleave functions I see in mempolicy.c are: > > interleave_nodes(), which takes a mempolicy, which I don't have in > hugetlb.c > > interleave_nid(), which also takes a mempolicy > > I guess I could try and use huge_zonelist(), but I don't see the point? Export a function for the interleave functionality so that we do not have to replicate the same thing in various locations in the kernel. -- 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