Re: question on NUMA page migration

From: Ingo Molnar
Date: Fri Oct 19 2012 - 21:23:42 EST

* Rik van Riel <riel@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On 10/19/2012 01:53 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> >On Fri, 2012-10-19 at 13:13 -0400, Rik van Riel wrote:
> >>Another alternative might be to do the put_page inside
> >>do_prot_none_numa(). That would be analogous to do_wp_page
> >>disposing of the old page for the caller.
> >
> >It'd have to be inside migrate_misplaced_page(), can't do before
> >isolate_lru_page() or the page might disappear. Doing it after is
> >(obviously) too late.
> Keeping an extra refcount on the page might _still_
> result in it disappearing from the process by some
> other means, in-between you grabbing the refcount
> and invoking migration of the page.
> >>I am not real happy about NUMA migration introducing its own
> >>migration mode...
> >
> >You didn't seem to mind too much earlier, but I can remove it if you
> >want.
> Could have been reviewing fatigue :)


> And yes, it would have been nice to not have a special
> migration mode for sched/numa.
> Speaking of, when do you guys plan to submit a (cleaned up)
> version of the sched/numa patch series for review on lkml?

Which commit(s) worry you specifically?


To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at