Re: [PATCH 5/8] sched, numa, mm: Add adaptive NUMA affinity support

[Andi Kleen]

Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@xxxxxxxxx> writes:

> +
> +		down_write(&mm->mmap_sem);
> +		for (vma = mm->mmap; vma; vma = vma->vm_next) {
> +			if (!vma_migratable(vma))
> +				continue;
> +			change_protection(vma, vma->vm_start, vma->vm_end, vma_prot_none(vma), 0);
> +		}

What happens if I have a 1TB process? Will you really unmap all of the
1TB in that timer?


>  
>  	case MPOL_PREFERRED:
>  		if (pol->flags & MPOL_F_LOCAL)
> -			polnid = numa_node_id();
> +			best_nid = numa_node_id();
>  		else
> -			polnid = pol->v.preferred_node;
> +			best_nid = pol->v.preferred_node;

So that's not the local node anymore?  That will change behaviour for
people using the NUMA affinity APIs explicitely.  I don't think that's a
good idea, if someone set the affinity explicitely the kernel better
follow that.

If you want to change behaviour for non DEFAULT like this
please use a new policy type.

-Andi

-- 
ak@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx -- Speaking for myself only
--
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/