[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0609131517370.20316@schroedinger.engr.sgi.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2006 15:28:01 -0700 (PDT)
From: Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com>
To: Ravikiran G Thirumalai <kiran@...lex86.org>
cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Alok Kataria <alok.kataria@...softinc.com>,
"Shai Fultheim (Shai@...lex86.org)" <shai@...lex86.org>,
Christoph Lameter <clameter@...r.sgi.com>,
"Benzi Galili (Benzi@...leMP.com)" <benzi@...lemp.com>
Subject: Re: [patch] slab: Do not use mempolicy for kmalloc_node
I wish first of all that the description would accurately describe the
problem.
On Wed, 13 Sep 2006, Ravikiran G Thirumalai wrote:
> +/* Allocate object from the array cache of the executing cpu */
I am not sure what this adds.
> +/*
> + * Allocate object from the appropriate node as per mempolicy/cpuset
> + * constraints
> + */
We only do this under certain conditions. The main purpose of this
function is to allocate an object without having specified a node.
> unsigned long save_flags;
> void *objp;
> -
> cache_alloc_debugcheck_before(cachep, flags);
> -
> local_irq_save(save_flags);
Extra material.
> +
> +#ifdef CONFIG_NUMA
> + if (unlikely(current->flags & (PF_SPREAD_SLAB | PF_MEMPOLICY))) {
> + objp = alternate_node_alloc(cachep, flags);
> + if (objp != NULL) {
> + local_irq_restore(save_flags);
> + prefetchw(objp);
> + return objp;
> + }
> + }
> +#endif
> +
Ok.
> @@ -3303,9 +3309,10 @@ void *kmem_cache_alloc_node(struct kmem_
> cache_alloc_debugcheck_before(cachep, flags);
> local_irq_save(save_flags);
>
> - if (nodeid == -1 || nodeid == numa_node_id() ||
> - !cachep->nodelists[nodeid])
> + if (nodeid == numa_node_id())
> ptr = ____cache_alloc(cachep, flags);
> + else if (nodeid == -1 || !cachep->nodelists[nodeid])
> + ptr = __cache_alloc(cachep, flags, __builtin_return_address(0));
> else
We are still allocating according to policy if nodeid == -1 or if we have
an invalid node? I thought we agreed that kmalloc_node should never
obey memory policies?
Simply move the #ifdef CONFIG_NUMA block as we agreed last night. And fix
the description to specify under what conditions kmalloc_node will obey
memory policies.
-
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists