Re: [PATCH v2 3/7] x86, gfp: Cache best near node for memory allocation.

[Tang Chen]

Hi, Christoph, tj,

On 09/11/2015 08:14 AM, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> On Thu, 10 Sep 2015, Tejun Heo wrote:
>
> > > Why not just update node_data[]->node_zonelist in the first place?
> > > Also, what's the synchronization rule here?  How are allocators
> > > synchronized against node hot [un]plugs?
> > Also, shouldn't kmalloc_node() or any public allocator fall back
> > automatically to a near node w/o GFP_THISNODE?  Why is this failing at
> > all?  I get that cpu id -> node id mapping changing messes up the
> > locality but allocations shouldn't fail, right?

Yes. That is the reason we are getting near online node here.

> Yes that should occur in the absence of other constraints (mempolicies,
> cpusets, cgroups, allocation type). If the constraints do not allow an
> allocation then the allocation will fail.
>
> Also: Are the zonelists setup the right way?

zonelist will be rebuilt in __offline_pages() when the zone is not 
populated any more.

Thanks.
--
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/