From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2007 20:50:49 -0700 (PDT) From: Christoph Lameter Subject: Re: [PATCH v6][RFC] Fix hugetlb pool allocation with empty nodes In-Reply-To: <20070612034407.GB11773@holomorphy.com> Message-ID: References: <20070611202728.GD9920@us.ibm.com> <20070611221036.GA14458@us.ibm.com> <20070611225213.GB14458@us.ibm.com> <20070611230829.GC14458@us.ibm.com> <20070611231008.GD14458@us.ibm.com> <20070612001542.GJ14458@us.ibm.com> <20070612034407.GB11773@holomorphy.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: William Lee Irwin III Cc: Nishanth Aravamudan , lee.schermerhorn@hp.com, anton@samba.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: On Mon, 11 Jun 2007, William Lee Irwin III wrote: > I wrote that, so I figure I should chime in. The static variable can > be killed off outright. I agree. > Initially filling the pool doesn't need the static affair. Refilling > the pool from the page allocator can refill the node with the least > memory first, and choose randomly otherwise. Using default mpolicies > or defaulting to node-local memory instead of round-robin allocation > will likely do for callers into the allocator. Each task already has a next node field. Just use that. -- 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