From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>
Subject: Re: alloc_pages_node(... GFP_KERNEL | GFP_THISNODE ...) fails
Date: Fri, 29 May 2009 17:01:57 +0200
Message-ID: <20090529150157.GT1065@one.firstfloor.org>
References: <200905290230.16306.max@laiers.net> <f568093c0905281743i63e1a24ak681df87bc83826ce@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.DEB.1.10.0905282043390.32466@gentwo.org> <200905290309.33194.max@laiers.net> <alpine.DEB.1.10.0905290951340.17436@gentwo.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Return-path: <linux-numa-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.1.10.0905290951340.17436@gentwo.org>
Sender: linux-numa-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-numa.vger.kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: Christoph Lameter <cl@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Max Laier <max@laiers.net>, linux-numa@vger.kernel.org, David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>

On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 09:54:06AM -0400, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> On Fri, 29 May 2009, Max Laier wrote:
> 
> > Same result.  "numa_hit" in node 7 increases, while "nr_free_pages" stays
> > the same.  Anything else you'd want me to watch out for?
> 
> That looks like a bug in fake numa.

I also got some reports of fake numa being a bit broken recently.

-Andi

-- 
ak@linux.intel.com -- Speaking for myself only.