Re: alloc_pages_node(... GFP_KERNEL | GFP_THISNODE ...) fails

["Max Laier" <max@laiers.net>]

Am Fr, 29.05.2009, 17:01, schrieb Andi Kleen:
> 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.

That might have been me too - I sent you a private mail earlier this week.

I guess the question is, what is special about my allocation in KVM as
opposed to the allocation in the test module (that works as expected). 
The userland test tools from the numactl package also work as expected in
membind mode.

Also, I have been reading the fake numa setup back and forth and I really
don't see any obvious difference to the ACPI driven setup - so maybe it's
a general problem, but it's just that more people are running fake numa so
the problem is reported there first?

I'll take another look at the fake numa setup later today.  Any chance
somebody could give the KVM thing a try on real numa hardware?  Though
there are probably not that many systems that have real numa and kvm
support ... dual socket Gainestown setup anyone?

-- 
/"\  Best regards,                      | mlaier@freebsd.org
\ /  Max Laier                          | ICQ #67774661
 X   http://pf4freebsd.love2party.net/  | mlaier@EFnet
/ \  ASCII Ribbon Campaign              | Against HTML Mail and News