linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 16/22] Do not setup zonelist cache when there is only one node

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 22 Apr 2009 13:34:27 -0700 (PDT)
From:	David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
To:	Lee Schermerhorn <Lee.Schermerhorn@...com>
cc:	Mel Gorman <mel@....ul.ie>,
	Linux Memory Management List <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
	KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>,
	Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Lin Ming <ming.m.lin@...el.com>,
	Zhang Yanmin <yanmin_zhang@...ux.intel.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 16/22] Do not setup zonelist cache when there is only
 one node

On Wed, 22 Apr 2009, Lee Schermerhorn wrote:

> > > diff --git a/mm/page_alloc.c b/mm/page_alloc.c
> > > index 7f45de1..e59bb80 100644
> > > --- a/mm/page_alloc.c
> > > +++ b/mm/page_alloc.c
> > > @@ -1467,8 +1467,11 @@ this_zone_full:
> > >  		if (NUMA_BUILD)
> > >  			zlc_mark_zone_full(zonelist, z);
> > 
> > If zonelist caching is never used for UMA machines, why should they ever 
> > call zlc_mark_zone_full()?  It will always dereference 
> > zonelist->zlcache_ptr and immediately return without doing anything.
> > 
> > Wouldn't it better to just add
> > 
> > 	if (num_online_nodes() == 1)
> > 		continue;
> > 
> > right before this call to zlc_mark_zone_full()?  This should compile out 
> > the remainder of the loop for !CONFIG_NUMA kernels anyway.
> 
> Shouldn't it already do that?  NUMA_BUILD is defined as 0 when
> !CONFIG_NUMA to avoid #ifdef's in the code while still allowing compiler
> error checking in the dead code.
> 

Yeah, but adding the check on num_online_nodes() also prevents needlessly 
calling zlc_mark_zone_full() on CONFIG_NUMA kernels when running on an UMA 
machine.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/