Re: [BUG] at mm/slab.c:3320

[Christoph Lameter <clameter@sgi.com>]

On Thu, 17 Jan 2008, Pekka Enberg wrote:

> > +       if (!objp) {
> > +               int node_id = numa_node_id();
> > +               if (likely(cache->nodelists[node_id])) /* fast path */
> > +                       objp = ____cache_alloc_node(cache, flags, node_id);
> > +               else /* this function can do good fallback */
> > +                       objp = __cache_alloc_node(cache, flags, node_id,
> > +                                       __builtin_return_address(0));
> > +       }
> 
> But __cache_alloc_node() will call fallback_alloc() that does
> cache_grow() for the node that doesn't have N_NORMAL_MEMORY, no?

No fallback_alloc will fallback to a node that has normal memory.

 > Shouldn't we just revert 04231b3002ac53f8a64a7bd142fde3fa4b6808c6 for
> 2.6.24 as this is a clear regression from 2.6.23?

Hmmm... Does reverting it actually fix the issue? We have done a lot of 
changes in regards to memoryless nodes.

--
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>