From: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
To: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
Greg Thelen <gthelen@google.com>,
"Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com>,
Pekka Enberg <penberg@kernel.org>,
Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>,
Naoya Horiguchi <n-horiguchi@ah.jp.nec.com>,
linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
cbe-oss-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/3] mm: use numa_mem_id() in alloc_pages_node()
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2015 17:41:12 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150730174112.GC15257@cmpxchg.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1438274071-22551-3-git-send-email-vbabka@suse.cz>
On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 06:34:31PM +0200, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
> numa_mem_id() is able to handle allocation from CPUs on memory-less nodes,
> so it's a more robust fallback than the currently used numa_node_id().
Won't it fall through to the next closest memory node in the zonelist
anyway? Is this for callers doing NUMA_NO_NODE with __GFP_THISZONE?
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
To: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
Greg Thelen <gthelen@google.com>,
"Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com>,
Pekka Enberg <penberg@kernel.org>,
Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>,
Naoya Horiguchi <n-horiguchi@ah.jp.nec.com>,
linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
cbe-oss-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/3] mm: use numa_mem_id() in alloc_pages_node()
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2015 13:41:12 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150730174112.GC15257@cmpxchg.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1438274071-22551-3-git-send-email-vbabka@suse.cz>
On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 06:34:31PM +0200, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
> numa_mem_id() is able to handle allocation from CPUs on memory-less nodes,
> so it's a more robust fallback than the currently used numa_node_id().
Won't it fall through to the next closest memory node in the zonelist
anyway? Is this for callers doing NUMA_NO_NODE with __GFP_THISZONE?
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
To: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
Greg Thelen <gthelen@google.com>,
"Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com>,
Pekka Enberg <penberg@kernel.org>,
Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>,
Naoya Horiguchi <n-horiguchi@ah.jp.nec.com>,
linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
cbe-oss-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/3] mm: use numa_mem_id() in alloc_pages_node()
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2015 13:41:12 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150730174112.GC15257@cmpxchg.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1438274071-22551-3-git-send-email-vbabka@suse.cz>
On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 06:34:31PM +0200, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
> numa_mem_id() is able to handle allocation from CPUs on memory-less nodes,
> so it's a more robust fallback than the currently used numa_node_id().
Won't it fall through to the next closest memory node in the zonelist
anyway? Is this for callers doing NUMA_NO_NODE with __GFP_THISZONE?
--
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>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-07-30 17:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 49+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-07-30 16:34 [PATCH v3 1/3] mm: rename alloc_pages_exact_node to __alloc_pages_node Vlastimil Babka
2015-07-30 16:34 ` Vlastimil Babka
2015-07-30 16:34 ` Vlastimil Babka
2015-07-30 16:34 ` Vlastimil Babka
2015-07-30 16:34 ` [PATCH v3 2/3] mm: unify checks in alloc_pages_node() and __alloc_pages_node() Vlastimil Babka
2015-07-30 16:34 ` Vlastimil Babka
2015-07-30 16:34 ` Vlastimil Babka
2015-07-30 17:35 ` Johannes Weiner
2015-07-30 17:35 ` Johannes Weiner
2015-07-30 17:35 ` Johannes Weiner
2015-07-30 17:59 ` Christoph Lameter
2015-07-30 17:59 ` Christoph Lameter
2015-07-30 17:59 ` Christoph Lameter
2015-07-30 16:34 ` [PATCH v3 3/3] mm: use numa_mem_id() in alloc_pages_node() Vlastimil Babka
2015-07-30 16:34 ` Vlastimil Babka
2015-07-30 16:34 ` Vlastimil Babka
2015-07-30 17:41 ` Johannes Weiner [this message]
2015-07-30 17:41 ` Johannes Weiner
2015-07-30 17:41 ` Johannes Weiner
2015-08-06 7:00 ` Vlastimil Babka
2015-08-06 7:00 ` Vlastimil Babka
2015-08-06 7:00 ` Vlastimil Babka
2015-07-30 17:59 ` Christoph Lameter
2015-07-30 17:59 ` Christoph Lameter
2015-07-30 17:59 ` Christoph Lameter
2015-07-30 17:33 ` [PATCH v3 1/3] mm: rename alloc_pages_exact_node to __alloc_pages_node Johannes Weiner
2015-07-30 17:33 ` Johannes Weiner
2015-07-30 17:33 ` Johannes Weiner
2015-07-30 17:33 ` Johannes Weiner
2015-07-30 17:58 ` Christoph Lameter
2015-07-30 17:58 ` Christoph Lameter
2015-07-30 17:58 ` Christoph Lameter
2015-07-30 17:58 ` Christoph Lameter
2015-07-30 19:59 ` Vlastimil Babka
2015-07-30 19:59 ` Vlastimil Babka
2015-07-30 19:59 ` Vlastimil Babka
2015-07-30 19:59 ` Vlastimil Babka
2015-07-30 20:07 ` Christoph Lameter
2015-07-30 20:07 ` Christoph Lameter
2015-07-30 20:07 ` Christoph Lameter
2015-07-30 20:07 ` Christoph Lameter
2015-07-31 21:25 ` David Rientjes
2015-07-31 21:25 ` David Rientjes
2015-07-31 21:25 ` David Rientjes
2015-07-31 21:25 ` David Rientjes
2015-07-31 21:45 ` Vlastimil Babka
2015-07-31 21:45 ` Vlastimil Babka
2015-07-31 21:45 ` Vlastimil Babka
2015-07-31 21:45 ` Vlastimil Babka
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=20150730174112.GC15257@cmpxchg.org \
--to=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=cbe-oss-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=cl@linux.com \
--cc=gthelen@google.com \
--cc=iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=mgorman@techsingularity.net \
--cc=n-horiguchi@ah.jp.nec.com \
--cc=penberg@kernel.org \
--cc=rientjes@google.com \
--cc=vbabka@suse.cz \
/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.