[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20100215102221.GL5723@laptop>
Date: Mon, 15 Feb 2010 21:22:21 +1100
From: Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>
To: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
Cc: penberg@...helsinki.fi, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-mm@...ck.org, haicheng.li@...el.com, rientjes@...gle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] [1/4] SLAB: Handle node-not-up case in
fallback_alloc() v2
On Mon, Feb 15, 2010 at 11:07:12AM +0100, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > This is a better way to go anyway because it really is a proper
> > "fallback" alloc. I think that possibly used to work (ie. kmem_getpages
> > would be able to pass -1 for the node there) but got broken along the
> > line.
>
> Thanks for the review.
>
> I should add there's still one open problem: in some cases
> the oom killer kicks in on hotadd. Still working on that one.
>
> In general hotadd was mighty bitrotted :/
Yes, that doesn't surprise me. I'm sure you can handle it, but send
some traces if you have problems.
> > Although it's not such a hot path to begin with, care to put a branch
> > annotation there?
>
> pointer == NULL is already default unlikely in gcc
>
> /* Pointers are usually not NULL. */
> DEF_PREDICTOR (PRED_POINTER, "pointer", HITRATE (85), 0)
> DEF_PREDICTOR (PRED_TREE_POINTER, "pointer (on trees)", HITRATE (85), 0)
Well I still prefer to annotate it. I think builtin expect is 99%.
--
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