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  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:	Thu, 22 Mar 2012 21:21:00 -0400
From:	Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu
To:	lwoodman@...hat.com
Cc:	Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>,
	KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...il.com>,
	linux-mm@...ck.org,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
	Motohiro Kosaki <mkosaki@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -mm] do_migrate_pages() calls migrate_to_node() even if task is already on a correct node

On Thu, 22 Mar 2012 16:14:04 -0400, Larry Woodman said:
> On 03/22/2012 03:36 PM, Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu wrote:
> > On Thu, 22 Mar 2012 15:07:00 -0400, Larry Woodman said:
> >
> >> So to be clear on this, in that case the intention would be move 3 to 4,
> >> 4 to 5 and 5 to 6
> >> to keep the node ordering the same?
> > Would it make more sense to do 5->6, 4->5, 3->4?  If we move stuff
> > from 3 to 4 before clearing the old 4 stuff out, it might get crowded?
> >
> Yes, I didnt try to imply the order in which pages were moved just
> the additional moving necessary.

Oh, OK.. :)


Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped

Powered by blists - more mailing lists