From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: by wr-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id i4so111191wra for ; Wed, 30 Aug 2006 11:02:00 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2006 11:01:58 -0700 From: "Tim Pepper" Subject: Re: libnuma interleaving oddness In-Reply-To: <200608300932.23746.ak@suse.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <20060829231545.GY5195@us.ibm.com> <200608300919.13125.ak@suse.de> <20060830072948.GE5195@us.ibm.com> <200608300932.23746.ak@suse.de> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Andi Kleen Cc: Nishanth Aravamudan , Christoph Lameter , linux-mm@kvack.org, linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, agl@us.ibm.com List-ID: On 8/30/06, Andi Kleen wrote: > Then it's probably some new problem in hugetlbfs. It's something subtle though, because I _am_ able to get interleaving on hugetlbfs with a slightly simplified test case (see previous email) compared to Nish's. > Does it work with shmfs? Haven't tried shmfs, but the following correctly does the expected interleaving with hugepages (although not hugetlbfs backed): shmid = shmget( 0, NR_HUGE_PAGES, IPC_CREAT | SHM_HUGETLB | 0666 ); shmat_addr = shmat( shmid, NULL, 0 ); ... numa_interleave_memory( shmat_addr, SHM_SIZE, &nm ); I'd expect it works fine with non-huge pages, shmfs. > The regression test for hugetlbfs is numactl is unfortunately still disabled. > I need to enable it at some point for hugetlbfs now that it reached mainline. On my list of random things to do is trying to improve the test coverage in this area. We keep running into bugs or possible bugs or confusion on expected behaviour. I'm going through the code trying to understand it and writing little programs to confirm my understanding here and there anyway. Tim -- 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