[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <29495f1d0707141347g4f09f9c6pc4068f0fe4d2a6ae@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2007 13:47:14 -0700
From: "Nish Aravamudan" <nish.aravamudan@...il.com>
To: "Andrew Morton" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: "Joe Jin" <joe.jin@...cle.com>, bill.irwin@...cle.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, gurudas.pai@...cle.com,
"Paul Jackson" <pj@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add nid sanity on alloc_pages_node
On 7/14/07, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
> On Sat, 14 Jul 2007 10:40:25 -0700 "Nish Aravamudan" <nish.aravamudan@...il.com> wrote:
>
> > On 7/13/07, Joe Jin <joe.jin@...cle.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Patch gone too ;) I deleted it. I was hoping that you'd send me the final
> > > > finished product (please).
> > > >
> > >
> > > Ha.., the patch against 2.6.22, at your patch have use htlb_alloc_mask, but I
> > > cannot found it at 2.6.22 kernel tree, I think you must use difference kernel
> > > tree :)
> >
> > I believe this patch will be unnecessary if my "Fix hugetlb pool
> > allocation with empty nodes" patch gets pulled into -mm.
> > alloc_fresh_huge_page() now takes a mempolicy which is created by the
> > two callers, rather than reinventing interleaving itself. I believe
> > this will avoid the oops you saw. I am still waiting on some test
> > results (annoying -mm config changes) before I repost them (and they
> > depend on Christoph's fixes for memoryless nodes).
>
> Could be so, but the patch which I have queued is nice and simple and
> can be backported into 2.6.22.x.
Fair enough. FWIW, just finished testing my patches and have posted
the current incarnation to linux-mm.
Thanks,
Nish
-
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