All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
To: Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@gmail.com>
Cc: Mel Gorman <mel@csn.ul.ie>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>,
	Bob Liu <lliubbo@gmail.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
	Christoph Lameter <cl@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/6] change alloc function in pcpu_alloc_pages
Date: Thu, 15 Apr 2010 16:21:28 +0900	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4BC6BE78.1030503@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <v2j28c262361004141831h8f2110d5pa7a1e3063438cbf8@mail.gmail.com>

Hello,

On 04/15/2010 10:31 AM, Minchan Kim wrote:
> Hi, Tejun.
>> This being a pretty cold path, I don't really see much benefit in
>> converting it to alloc_pages_node_exact().  It ain't gonna make any
>> difference.  I'd rather stay with the safer / boring one unless
>> there's a pressing reason to convert.
> 
> Actually, It's to weed out not-good API usage as well as some
> performance gain.  But I don't think to need it strongly.
> Okay. Please keep in mind about this and correct it if you confirms
> it in future. :)

Hmm... if most users are converting over to alloc_pages_node_exact(),
I think it would be better to convert percpu too.  I thought it was a
performance optimization (of rather silly kind too).  So, this is to
weed out -1 node id usage?  Wouldn't it be better to update
alloc_pages_node() such that it whines once per each caller if it's
called with -1 node id and after updating most users convert the
warning into WARN_ON_ONCE()?  Having two variants for this seems
rather extreme to me.

Thanks.

-- 
tejun

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
To: Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@gmail.com>
Cc: Mel Gorman <mel@csn.ul.ie>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>,
	Bob Liu <lliubbo@gmail.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
	Christoph Lameter <cl@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/6] change alloc function in pcpu_alloc_pages
Date: Thu, 15 Apr 2010 16:21:28 +0900	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4BC6BE78.1030503@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <v2j28c262361004141831h8f2110d5pa7a1e3063438cbf8@mail.gmail.com>

Hello,

On 04/15/2010 10:31 AM, Minchan Kim wrote:
> Hi, Tejun.
>> This being a pretty cold path, I don't really see much benefit in
>> converting it to alloc_pages_node_exact().  It ain't gonna make any
>> difference.  I'd rather stay with the safer / boring one unless
>> there's a pressing reason to convert.
> 
> Actually, It's to weed out not-good API usage as well as some
> performance gain.  But I don't think to need it strongly.
> Okay. Please keep in mind about this and correct it if you confirms
> it in future. :)

Hmm... if most users are converting over to alloc_pages_node_exact(),
I think it would be better to convert percpu too.  I thought it was a
performance optimization (of rather silly kind too).  So, this is to
weed out -1 node id usage?  Wouldn't it be better to update
alloc_pages_node() such that it whines once per each caller if it's
called with -1 node id and after updating most users convert the
warning into WARN_ON_ONCE()?  Having two variants for this seems
rather extreme to me.

Thanks.

-- 
tejun

--
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>

  reply	other threads:[~2010-04-15  7:18 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 106+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-04-13 15:24 [PATCH 1/6] Remove node's validity check in alloc_pages Minchan Kim
2010-04-13 15:24 ` Minchan Kim
2010-04-13 15:24 ` [PATCH 2/6] change alloc function in pcpu_alloc_pages Minchan Kim
2010-04-13 15:24   ` Minchan Kim
2010-04-13 15:48   ` Mel Gorman
2010-04-13 15:48     ` Mel Gorman
2010-04-14 23:39     ` Tejun Heo
2010-04-14 23:39       ` Tejun Heo
2010-04-15  1:31       ` Minchan Kim
2010-04-15  1:31         ` Minchan Kim
2010-04-15  7:21         ` Tejun Heo [this message]
2010-04-15  7:21           ` Tejun Heo
2010-04-15  8:00           ` Minchan Kim
2010-04-15  8:00             ` Minchan Kim
2010-04-15  8:15             ` Tejun Heo
2010-04-15  8:15               ` Tejun Heo
2010-04-15  9:40               ` Minchan Kim
2010-04-15  9:40                 ` Minchan Kim
2010-04-15 10:08                 ` Tejun Heo
2010-04-15 10:08                   ` Tejun Heo
2010-04-15 10:21                   ` Minchan Kim
2010-04-15 10:21                     ` Minchan Kim
2010-04-15 10:33                     ` Minchan Kim
2010-04-15 10:33                       ` Minchan Kim
2010-04-15 11:43                     ` Tejun Heo
2010-04-15 11:43                       ` Tejun Heo
2010-04-15 11:49                       ` Minchan Kim
2010-04-15 11:49                         ` Minchan Kim
2010-04-16 16:07                         ` Christoph Lameter
2010-04-16 16:07                           ` Christoph Lameter
2010-04-16 19:13                           ` Lee Schermerhorn
2010-04-16 19:13                             ` Lee Schermerhorn
2010-04-18 15:55                             ` Minchan Kim
2010-04-18 15:55                               ` Minchan Kim
2010-04-18 15:54                           ` Minchan Kim
2010-04-18 15:54                             ` Minchan Kim
2010-04-18 21:22                             ` Tejun Heo
2010-04-18 21:22                               ` Tejun Heo
2010-04-19  0:03                               ` Minchan Kim
2010-04-19 17:45                                 ` Christoph Lameter
2010-04-20  0:20                                   ` Minchan Kim
2010-04-20  0:20                                     ` Minchan Kim
2010-04-19 17:38                             ` Christoph Lameter
2010-04-19 17:38                               ` Christoph Lameter
2010-04-19 22:27                               ` Tejun Heo
2010-04-19 22:27                                 ` Tejun Heo
2010-04-20 15:05                                 ` Mel Gorman
2010-04-20 15:05                                   ` Mel Gorman
2010-04-21 10:48                                   ` Tejun Heo
2010-04-21 10:48                                     ` Tejun Heo
2010-04-22 10:15                                     ` Minchan Kim
2010-04-22 10:15                                       ` Minchan Kim
2010-04-21 14:15                                   ` Christoph Lameter
2010-04-21 14:15                                     ` Christoph Lameter
2010-04-21 17:06                                     ` Minchan Kim
2010-04-21 17:06                                       ` Minchan Kim
2010-04-13 15:25 ` [PATCH 3/6] change alloc function in alloc_slab_page Minchan Kim
2010-04-13 15:25   ` Minchan Kim
2010-04-13 15:52   ` Mel Gorman
2010-04-13 15:52     ` Mel Gorman
2010-04-13 16:01     ` Minchan Kim
2010-04-13 16:01       ` Minchan Kim
2010-04-13 16:14       ` Mel Gorman
2010-04-13 16:14         ` Mel Gorman
2010-04-13 21:37   ` David Rientjes
2010-04-13 21:37     ` David Rientjes
2010-04-13 23:40     ` Minchan Kim
2010-04-13 23:40       ` Minchan Kim
2010-04-13 23:55       ` David Rientjes
2010-04-13 23:55         ` David Rientjes
2010-04-14  0:02         ` Minchan Kim
2010-04-14  0:02           ` Minchan Kim
2010-04-14  0:18   ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-04-14  0:18     ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-04-14 12:23     ` Pekka Enberg
2010-04-14 12:23       ` Pekka Enberg
2010-04-16 16:10       ` Christoph Lameter
2010-04-16 16:10         ` Christoph Lameter
2010-04-18 18:49         ` Pekka Enberg
2010-04-18 18:49           ` Pekka Enberg
2010-04-19  9:05         ` Mel Gorman
2010-04-19  9:05           ` Mel Gorman
2010-04-13 15:25 ` [PATCH 4/6] change alloc function in vmemmap_alloc_block Minchan Kim
2010-04-13 15:25   ` Minchan Kim
2010-04-13 15:59   ` Mel Gorman
2010-04-13 15:59     ` Mel Gorman
2010-04-14  0:19   ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-04-14  0:19     ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-04-13 15:25 ` [PATCH 5/6] change alloc function in __vmalloc_area_node Minchan Kim
2010-04-13 15:25   ` Minchan Kim
2010-04-13 16:02   ` Mel Gorman
2010-04-13 16:02     ` Mel Gorman
2010-04-14  0:22   ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-04-14  0:22     ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-04-14  0:33     ` Minchan Kim
2010-04-14  0:33       ` Minchan Kim
2010-04-13 15:25 ` [PATCH 6/6] Add comment in alloc_pages_exact_node Minchan Kim
2010-04-13 15:25   ` Minchan Kim
2010-04-13 16:13   ` Mel Gorman
2010-04-13 16:13     ` Mel Gorman
2010-04-13 16:20     ` Minchan Kim
2010-04-13 16:20       ` Minchan Kim
2010-04-13 15:32 ` [PATCH 1/6] Remove node's validity check in alloc_pages Mel Gorman
2010-04-13 15:32   ` Mel Gorman
2010-04-14  0:04 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-04-14  0:04   ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki

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=4BC6BE78.1030503@kernel.org \
    --to=tj@kernel.org \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=cl@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=lliubbo@gmail.com \
    --cc=mel@csn.ul.ie \
    --cc=minchan.kim@gmail.com \
    /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.