Re: [RFC PATCH 0/7] Replace _PAGE_NUMA with PAGE_NONE protections

From: Aneesh Kumar K.V
Date: Tue Nov 18 2014 - 11:56:55 EST

Sasha Levin <sasha.levin@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:

> On 11/18/2014 10:42 AM, Mel Gorman wrote:
>> 1. I'm assuming this is a KVM setup but can you confirm?
> Yes.
>> 2. Are you using numa=fake=N?
> Yes. numa=fake=24, which is probably way more nodes on any physical machine
> than the new code was tested on?
>> 3. If you are using fake NUMA, what happens if you boot without it as
>> that should make the patches a no-op?
> Nope, still seeing it without fake numa.
>> 4. Similarly, does the kernel boot properly without without patches?
> Yes, the kernel works fine without the patches both with and without fake
> numa.

Hmm that is interesting. I am not sure how writeback_fid can be
related. We use writeback fid to enable client side caching with 9p
(cache=loose). We use this fid to write back dirty pages later. Can you
share the qemu command line used, 9p mount options and the test details ?


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