On 6/26/07, Christoph Lameter <[email protected]> wrote:
On Tue, 26 Jun 2007, Nish Aravamudan wrote:
> > No. alloc_pages follows memory policy. alloc_pages_node does not. One of
> > the reasons that I want a new memory policy layer are these kinds of
> > strange uses.
>
> What would break by changing, in alloc_pages_node()
>
> if (nid < 0)
> nid = numa_node_id();
>
> to
>
> if (nid < 0)
> return alloc_pages_current(gfp_mask, order);
>
> beyond needing to make alloc_pages_current() defined if !NUMA too.
It would make alloc_pages_node obey memory policies instead of only
following cpuset constraints. An a memory policy may redirect the
allocation from the local node ;-).
heh, true true.
Hrm, I guess the simplest looking solution is rarely the best. Could
we add more smarts in alloc_pages_current() to make GFP_THISNODE be
equivalent to bind_zonelist(thisnode_only_mask)? I'll keep thinking,
maybe I'll come up with something.
Thanks,
Nish
-
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]
