lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2011]   [Feb]   [24]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] hugetlbfs: correct handling of negative input to /proc/sys/vm/nr_hugepages
On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 04:18:18PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Tue, 22 Feb 2011 10:02:36 +0000
> Mel Gorman <mel@csn.ul.ie> wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Feb 21, 2011 at 04:47:49PM +0100, Petr Holasek wrote:
> > > When user insert negative value into /proc/sys/vm/nr_hugepages it will result
> > > in the setting a random number of HugePages in system (can be easily showed
> > > at /proc/meminfo output).
> >
> > I bet you a shiny penny that the value of HugePages becomes the maximum
> > number that could be allocated by the system at the time rather than a
> > random value.
>
> That seems to be the case from my reading. In which case the patch
> removes probably-undocumented and possibly-useful existing behavior.
>

It's not proof that no one does this but I'm not aware of any documentation
related to hugetlbfs that recommends writing negative values to take advantage
of this side-effect. It's more likely they simply wrote a very large number
to nr_hugepages if they wanted "as many hugepages as possible" as it makes
more intuitive sense than asking for a negative amount of pages. hugeadm at
least is not depending on this behaviour AFAIK.

--
Mel Gorman
SUSE Labs


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2011-02-24 10:51    [W:0.041 / U:0.184 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site