From: Luiz Capitulino <lcapitulino@redhat.com>
To: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
isimatu.yasuaki@jp.fujitsu.com, yinghai@kernel.org,
andi@firstfloor.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
rientjes@google.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: numa: setup_node_data(): drop dead code and rename function
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2014 11:05:01 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140626110501.78bb611d@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <53AC335F.4010308@redhat.com>
On Thu, 26 Jun 2014 10:51:11 -0400
Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com> wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 06/19/2014 10:20 PM, Luiz Capitulino wrote:
>
> > @@ -523,8 +508,17 @@ static int __init numa_register_memblks(struct
> > numa_meminfo *mi) end = max(mi->blk[i].end, end); }
> >
> > - if (start < end) - setup_node_data(nid, start, end); + if
> > (start >= end) + continue; + + /* + * Don't confuse VM with a
> > node that doesn't have the + * minimum amount of memory: + */ +
> > if (end && (end - start) < NODE_MIN_SIZE) + continue; + +
> > alloc_node_data(nid); }
>
> Minor nit. If we skip a too-small node, should we remember that we
> did so, and add its memory to another node, assuming it is physically
> contiguous memory?
Interesting point. Honest question, please disregard if this doesn't
make sense: but won't this affect automatic numa performance? Because
the kernel won't know that that extra memory actually pertains to another
node and hence that extra memory will have a difference distance of the
node that's making use it of it.
If my thinking is wrong or if even then you believe this is a good feature,
I can work on it on a different patch, as this check is not being introduced
by this patch. Although I also wonder how many numa machines have such small
nodes...
> Other than that...
>
> Acked-by: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
Thanks!
>
> - --
> All rights reversed
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/
>
> iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJTrDNfAAoJEM553pKExN6DrNgH/j160OIey5moCEFMH51a1e3+
> D6iOIXxsVii5/wqabYuA1DCQ8Asgd/UK2BWdxxRZVZuTHXXn97iifq1IkIPEQxXc
> pjz25/ZFSpa3fgZk8iyUzOQjLukFfkiaO1mSopO7IWwUZoEa9fJ7bOBvwcnFU4oQ
> uZAV375RpxiPEXNh2qQZXX0kNrycZd8S81jUSuQv3OLPRI1EQo+txOg/u7ir0pOJ
> z1fkBK0hiSHziAzB/nyjR/RgSb23vpMlUlPoGMhwCMp08aJkL147bHZvsCtlg/w4
> kBqq/zy9te4ecSicUsX/l16o0SJ9a1JtvFAlqz0iqlGcKQGCEw2P+y0ZyrhfvaE=
> =NOgK
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Luiz Capitulino <lcapitulino@redhat.com>
To: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
isimatu.yasuaki@jp.fujitsu.com, yinghai@kernel.org,
andi@firstfloor.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
rientjes@google.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: numa: setup_node_data(): drop dead code and rename function
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2014 11:05:01 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140626110501.78bb611d@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <53AC335F.4010308@redhat.com>
On Thu, 26 Jun 2014 10:51:11 -0400
Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com> wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 06/19/2014 10:20 PM, Luiz Capitulino wrote:
>
> > @@ -523,8 +508,17 @@ static int __init numa_register_memblks(struct
> > numa_meminfo *mi) end = max(mi->blk[i].end, end); }
> >
> > - if (start < end) - setup_node_data(nid, start, end); + if
> > (start >= end) + continue; + + /* + * Don't confuse VM with a
> > node that doesn't have the + * minimum amount of memory: + */ +
> > if (end && (end - start) < NODE_MIN_SIZE) + continue; + +
> > alloc_node_data(nid); }
>
> Minor nit. If we skip a too-small node, should we remember that we
> did so, and add its memory to another node, assuming it is physically
> contiguous memory?
Interesting point. Honest question, please disregard if this doesn't
make sense: but won't this affect automatic numa performance? Because
the kernel won't know that that extra memory actually pertains to another
node and hence that extra memory will have a difference distance of the
node that's making use it of it.
If my thinking is wrong or if even then you believe this is a good feature,
I can work on it on a different patch, as this check is not being introduced
by this patch. Although I also wonder how many numa machines have such small
nodes...
> Other than that...
>
> Acked-by: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
Thanks!
>
> - --
> All rights reversed
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/
>
> iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJTrDNfAAoJEM553pKExN6DrNgH/j160OIey5moCEFMH51a1e3+
> D6iOIXxsVii5/wqabYuA1DCQ8Asgd/UK2BWdxxRZVZuTHXXn97iifq1IkIPEQxXc
> pjz25/ZFSpa3fgZk8iyUzOQjLukFfkiaO1mSopO7IWwUZoEa9fJ7bOBvwcnFU4oQ
> uZAV375RpxiPEXNh2qQZXX0kNrycZd8S81jUSuQv3OLPRI1EQo+txOg/u7ir0pOJ
> z1fkBK0hiSHziAzB/nyjR/RgSb23vpMlUlPoGMhwCMp08aJkL147bHZvsCtlg/w4
> kBqq/zy9te4ecSicUsX/l16o0SJ9a1JtvFAlqz0iqlGcKQGCEw2P+y0ZyrhfvaE=
> =NOgK
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-06-26 15:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-06-20 2:20 [PATCH] x86: numa: setup_node_data(): drop dead code and rename function Luiz Capitulino
2014-06-20 2:20 ` Luiz Capitulino
2014-06-26 14:51 ` Rik van Riel
2014-06-26 14:51 ` Rik van Riel
2014-06-26 15:05 ` Luiz Capitulino [this message]
2014-06-26 15:05 ` Luiz Capitulino
2014-06-26 15:51 ` Rik van Riel
2014-06-26 15:51 ` Rik van Riel
2014-06-30 23:42 ` David Rientjes
2014-06-30 23:42 ` David Rientjes
2014-07-02 17:33 ` Luiz Capitulino
2014-07-02 17:33 ` Luiz Capitulino
2014-07-02 23:20 ` David Rientjes
2014-07-02 23:20 ` David Rientjes
2014-07-03 3:39 ` Luiz Capitulino
2014-07-03 3:39 ` Luiz Capitulino
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20140626110501.78bb611d@redhat.com \
--to=lcapitulino@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=andi@firstfloor.org \
--cc=isimatu.yasuaki@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=riel@redhat.com \
--cc=rientjes@google.com \
--cc=yinghai@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.