Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 21 Sep 2009 14:17:40 -0400 (EDT) | From | Christoph Lameter <> | Subject | Re: [RFC PATCH 0/3] Fix SLQB on memoryless configurations V2 |
| |
On Mon, 21 Sep 2009, Mel Gorman wrote: > Can you spot if there is something fundamentally wrong with patch 2? I.e. what > is wrong with treating the closest node as local instead of only the > closest node?
Depends on the way locking is done for percpu queues (likely lockless). A misidentification of the numa locality of an object may result in locks not being taken that should have been taken.
> > Or just allow SLQB for !NUMA configurations and merge it now. > > > > Forcing SLQB !NUMA will not rattle out any existing list issues > unfortunately :(.
But it will make SLQB work right in permitted configurations. The NUMA issues can then be fixed later upstream.
| |