Re: [PATCH] Add nid sanity on alloc_pages_node

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 




On Fri, 13 Jul 2007 10:45:07 +0800 Joe Jin <[email protected]> wrote:

Something like this?

--- a/mm/hugetlb.c~a
+++ a/mm/hugetlb.c
@@ -105,13 +105,20 @@ static void free_huge_page(struct page *
static int alloc_fresh_huge_page(void)
 {
-	static int nid = 0;
+	static int prev_nid;
+	static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(nid_lock);
 	struct page *page;
-	page = alloc_pages_node(nid, htlb_alloc_mask|__GFP_COMP|__GFP_NOWARN,
-					HUGETLB_PAGE_ORDER);
-	nid = next_node(nid, node_online_map);
+	int nid;
+
+	spin_lock(&nid_lock);
+	nid = next_node(prev_nid, node_online_map);
 	if (nid == MAX_NUMNODES)
 		nid = first_node(node_online_map);
+	prev_nid = nid;
+	spin_unlock(&nid_lock);
+
+	page = alloc_pages_node(nid, htlb_alloc_mask|__GFP_COMP|__GFP_NOWARN,
+					HUGETLB_PAGE_ORDER);
 	if (page) {
 		set_compound_page_dtor(page, free_huge_page);
 		spin_lock(&hugetlb_lock);
_

I think this will never get pages from node 0 ? Because nid = next_node(prev_node,node_online_map) and even if prev_node = 0, nid will become 1.

It'll start out at node 1.  But it will visit the final node (which is less
than MAX_NUMNODES) and will then advance onto the fist node (which can be
= 0).

This code needs a bit of thought and testing for the non-numa case too
please.  At the least, there might be optimisation opportunities.
I tested on non-numa machine. Your patch works fine.

Thanks,
-Guru


-
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]
  Powered by Linux