On Tue, 12 Sep 2006, Ravikiran G Thirumalai wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 12, 2006 at 10:36:54AM -0700, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> > On Tue, 12 Sep 2006, Ravikiran G Thirumalai wrote:
> >
> > ...
> > This is not complete. Please see the discussion on GFP_THISNODE and the
> > related patch to fix this issue
> > http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-mm&m=115505682122540&w=2
>
> Hmm, I see, but with the above patch, if we ignore mempolicy for
> __GFP_THISNODE slab caches at alternate_node_alloc (which is pretty much
> all the slab caches) then we would be ignoring memplocies altogether no?
We are implementing memory policies in the slab layer. I.e. we
are taking slab objects round robin from the per node lists of the
slab.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
