[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAGM2reatQzroymAb8kaPKgd8sEehtScH9DAELeWpYCaNNnAU6w@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 1 Jul 2018 23:03:24 -0400
From: Pavel Tatashin <pasha.tatashin@...cle.com>
To: bhe@...hat.com
Cc: Steven Sistare <steven.sistare@...cle.com>,
Daniel Jordan <daniel.m.jordan@...cle.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com, Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>,
Linux Memory Management List <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
dan.j.williams@...el.com, jack@...e.cz, jglisse@...hat.com,
Souptick Joarder <jrdr.linux@...il.com>,
gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
Wei Yang <richard.weiyang@...il.com>, dave.hansen@...el.com,
rientjes@...gle.com, mingo@...nel.org, osalvador@...hadventures.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] mm/sparse: add sparse_init_nid()
> Ah, yes, I misunderstood it, sorry for that.
>
> Then I have only one concern, for vmemmap case, if one section doesn't
> succeed to populate its memmap, do we need to skip all the remaining
> sections in that node?
Yes, in sparse_populate_node() we have the following:
294 for (pnum = pnum_begin; map_index < map_count; pnum++) {
295 if (!present_section_nr(pnum))
296 continue;
297 if (!sparse_mem_map_populate(pnum, nid, NULL))
298 break;
So, on the first failure, we even stop trying to populate other
sections. No more memory to do so.
Pavel
Powered by blists - more mailing lists