Re: [RFC PATCH V5] mm readahead: Fix readahead fail for no localmemory and limit readahead pages

[David Rientjes]

On Thu, 6 Feb 2014, David Rientjes wrote:

> > > > > +#define MAX_REMOTE_READAHEAD   4096UL

> Normally it wouldn't matter because there's no significant downside to it 
> racing, things like mempolicies which use numa_node_id() extensively would 
> result in, oops, a page allocation on the wrong node.
> 
> This stands out to me, though, because you're expecting the calculation to 
> be correct for a specific node.
> 
> The patch is still wrong, though, it should just do
> 
> 	int node = ACCESS_ONCE(numa_mem_id());
> 	return min(nr, (node_page_state(node, NR_INACTIVE_FILE) +
> 		        node_page_state(node, NR_FREE_PAGES)) / 2);
> 
> since we want to readahead based on the cpu's local node, the comment 
> saying we're reading ahead onto "remote memory" is wrong since a 
> memoryless node has local affinity to numa_mem_id().
> 

Oops, forgot about the MAX_REMOTE_READAHEAD which needs to be factored in 
as well, but this handles the bound on local node's statistics.
--
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/