Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 26 Jun 2007 12:04:18 -0700 | From | "Nish Aravamudan" <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] slob: poor man's NUMA support. |
| |
On 6/26/07, Christoph Lameter <clameter@sgi.com> wrote: > On Tue, 26 Jun 2007, Andrew Morton wrote: > > > > +#ifdef CONFIG_NUMA > > > + if (node != -1) > > > + page = alloc_pages_node(node, gfp, order); > > > + else > > > +#endif > > > + page = alloc_pages(gfp, order); > > > > Isn't the above equivalent to a bare > > > > page = alloc_pages_node(node, gfp, order); > > > > ? > > 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.
Thanks, Nish - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |