Re: [PATCH] slob: poor man's NUMA support.

[Nish Aravamudan]

On 6/26/07, Christoph Lameter <clameter@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Tue, 26 Jun 2007, Andrew Morton wrote:
>
> > > +#ifdef CONFIG_NUMA
> > > +   if (node != -1)
> > > +           page = alloc_pages_node(node, gfp, order);
> > > +   else
> > > +#endif
> > > +           page = alloc_pages(gfp, order);
> >
> > Isn't the above equivalent to a bare
> >
> >       page = alloc_pages_node(node, gfp, order);
> >
> > ?
>
> No. alloc_pages follows memory policy. alloc_pages_node does not. One of
> the reasons that I want a new memory policy layer are these kinds of
> strange uses.

What would break by changing, in alloc_pages_node()

       if (nid < 0)
               nid = numa_node_id();

to

       if (nid < 0)
               return alloc_pages_current(gfp_mask, order);

beyond needing to make alloc_pages_current() defined if !NUMA too.

Thanks,
Nish
-
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/