Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 16 Feb 2023 07:11:19 +0800 | Subject | Re: [PATCH 0/2] handle memoryless nodes more appropriately | From | Qi Zheng <> |
| |
On 2023/2/16 00:36, Michal Hocko wrote: > On Wed 15-02-23 23:24:10, Qi Zheng wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> Currently, in the process of initialization or offline memory, memoryless >> nodes will still be built into the fallback list of itself or other nodes. >> >> This is not what we expected, so this patch series removes memoryless >> nodes from the fallback list entirely. >> >> Comments and suggestions are welcome.
Hi Michal,
> > This is a tricky area full of surprises and it is really easy to
Would you mind giving an example of a "new problem"?
> introduce new problems. What kind of problem/issue are you trying to > solve/handle by these changes?
IIUC, I think there are two reasons:
Firstly, as mentioned in commit message, the memoryless node has no memory to allocate (If it can be allocated, it may also cause the panic I mentioned in [1]), so we should not continue to traverse it when allocating memory at runtime, which will have a certain overhead.
Secondly, from the perspective of semantic correctness, why do we remove the memoryless node from the fallback list of other normal nodes (N_MEMORY), but not from its own fallback list (PATCH[1/2])? Why should an upcoming memoryless node continue exist in the fallback list of itself and other normal nodes (PATCH[2/2])?
Please let me know if I missed something.
[1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20230212110305.93670-1-zhengqi.arch@bytedance.com/
Thanks, Qi
>
| |