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

[Aneesh Kumar K.V]

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 ? 


-aneesh

--
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/