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 D0BC66B005D for ; Mon, 14 Sep 2009 15:15:45 -0400 (EDT) Received: from wpaz24.hot.corp.google.com (wpaz24.hot.corp.google.com [172.24.198.88]) by smtp-out.google.com with ESMTP id n8EJFlH9012152 for ; Mon, 14 Sep 2009 20:15:47 +0100 Received: from pzk10 (pzk10.prod.google.com [10.243.19.138]) by wpaz24.hot.corp.google.com with ESMTP id n8EJDeqn031369 for ; Mon, 14 Sep 2009 12:15:45 -0700 Received: by pzk10 with SMTP id 10so20068pzk.17 for ; Mon, 14 Sep 2009 12:15:44 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 14 Sep 2009 12:15:43 -0700 (PDT) From: David Rientjes Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/6] hugetlb: update hugetlb documentation for mempolicy based management. In-Reply-To: <20090914154112.GD11778@csn.ul.ie> Message-ID: References: <20090908200451.GA6481@csn.ul.ie> <20090908214109.GB6481@csn.ul.ie> <20090909081631.GB24614@csn.ul.ie> <20090910122641.GA31153@csn.ul.ie> <20090914133329.GC11778@csn.ul.ie> <1252937748.17132.111.camel@useless.americas.hpqcorp.net> <20090914154112.GD11778@csn.ul.ie> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: Mel Gorman Cc: Lee Schermerhorn , linux-mm@kvack.org, Andrew Morton , Nishanth Aravamudan , linux-numa@vger.kernel.org, Adam Litke , Andy Whitcroft , Eric Whitney , Randy Dunlap List-ID: On Mon, 14 Sep 2009, Mel Gorman wrote: > > > > > diff --git a/mm/hugetlb.c b/mm/hugetlb.c > > > > > index 83decd6..68abef0 100644 > > > > > --- a/mm/hugetlb.c > > > > > +++ b/mm/hugetlb.c > > > > > @@ -1244,6 +1244,7 @@ static int adjust_pool_surplus(struct hstate *h, nodemask_t *nodes_allowed, > > > > > return ret; > > > > > } > > > > > > > > > > +#define NUMA_NO_NODE_OBEY_MEMPOLICY (-2) > > > > How about defining NUMA_NO_NODE_OBEY_MEMPOLICY as (NUMA_NO_NODE - 1) > > just to ensure that it's different. Not sure it's worth an enum at this > > point. NUMA_NO_NODE_OBEY_MEMPOLICY is private to hugetlb at this time. > > > > That seems reasonable. > If the nodemask allocation is moved to the sysctl handler and nodemask_t is passed into set_max_huge_pages() instead of nid, you don't need NUMA_NO_NODE_OBEY_MEMPOLICY at all, though. -- 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