Re: [PATCH] hugetlbfs: correct handling of negative input to/proc/sys/vm/nr_hugepages

[Mel Gorman]

On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 04:18:18PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Tue, 22 Feb 2011 10:02:36 +0000
> Mel Gorman <mel@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> > On Mon, Feb 21, 2011 at 04:47:49PM +0100, Petr Holasek wrote:
> > > When user insert negative value into /proc/sys/vm/nr_hugepages it will result
> > > in the setting a random number of HugePages in system (can be easily showed
> > > at /proc/meminfo output).
> > 
> > I bet you a shiny penny that the value of HugePages becomes the maximum
> > number that could be allocated by the system at the time rather than a
> > random value.
> 
> That seems to be the case from my reading.  In which case the patch
> removes probably-undocumented and possibly-useful existing behavior.
> 

It's not proof that no one does this but I'm not aware of any documentation
related to hugetlbfs that recommends writing negative values to take advantage
of this side-effect. It's more likely they simply wrote a very large number
to nr_hugepages if they wanted "as many hugepages as possible" as it makes
more intuitive sense than asking for a negative amount of pages. hugeadm at
least is not depending on this behaviour AFAIK.

-- 
Mel Gorman
SUSE Labs
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/