From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751384AbVKOIuF (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 Nov 2005 03:50:05 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751386AbVKOIuF (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 Nov 2005 03:50:05 -0500 Received: from smtp107.mail.sc5.yahoo.com ([66.163.169.227]:63332 "HELO smtp107.mail.sc5.yahoo.com") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1751384AbVKOIuB (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 Nov 2005 03:50:01 -0500 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com.au; h=Received:Message-ID:Date:From:User-Agent:X-Accept-Language:MIME-Version:To:CC:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=rmqq8uM3OoomTgSAiFSZABxWL5vuQcswn+NH9uPh699+z3ERUHdipv6AGbTqoeOnHn84YZU+q8HN6jtaL2F8JEDGsQ7DZ+9Lsde82Ufzf2WVeEqgxONHpd5smodJrn3ERsGD+JKcAL+1U0xbqtkEhwgqyepygtRDLJi1QbUVt8Y= ; Message-ID: <4379A1C4.509@yahoo.com.au> Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2005 19:52:20 +1100 From: Nick Piggin User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7.12) Gecko/20051007 Debian/1.7.12-1 X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Paul Jackson CC: akpm@osdl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, Simon Derr , Christoph Lameter , "Rohit, Seth" Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/05] mm fix __alloc_pages cpuset ALLOC_* flags References: <20051114040329.13951.39891.sendpatchset@jackhammer.engr.sgi.com> In-Reply-To: <20051114040329.13951.39891.sendpatchset@jackhammer.engr.sgi.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Paul Jackson wrote: > Two changes to the setting of the ALLOC_CPUSET flag in > mm/page_alloc.c:__alloc_pages() > > 1) A bug fix - the "ignoring mins" case should not be honoring > ALLOC_CPUSET. This case of all cases, since it is handling a > request that will free up more memory than is asked for (exiting > tasks, e.g.) should be allowed to escape cpuset constraints > when memory is tight. > > 2) A logic change to make it simpler. Honor cpusets even on > GFP_ATOMIC (!wait) requests. With this, cpuset confinement > applies to all requests except ALLOC_NO_WATERMARKS, so that > in a subsequent cleanup patch, I can remove the ALLOC_CPUSET > flag entirely. Since I don't know any real reason this > logic has to be either way, I am choosing the path of the > simplest code. > Hi, I think #1 is OK, however I was under the impression that you introduced the exception reverted in #2 due to seeing atomic allocation failures?! -- SUSE Labs, Novell Inc. Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.yahoo.com