Re: [PATCH] sched: Don't try allocating memory from offline nodes

[David Rientjes]

On Wed, 30 May 2012, Peter Zijlstra wrote:

> On Tue, 2012-05-29 at 20:21 -0700, David Rientjes wrote:
> > On Tue, 29 May 2012, Luck, Tony wrote:
> > 
> > > Index: linux-2.6/kernel/sched/core.c
> > > ===================================================================
> > > --- linux-2.6.orig/kernel/sched/core.c
> > > +++ linux-2.6/kernel/sched/core.c
> > > @@ -6449,7 +6449,7 @@ static void sched_init_numa(void)
> > >  			return;
> > >  
> > >  		for (j = 0; j < nr_node_ids; j++) {
> > > -			struct cpumask *mask = kzalloc_node(cpumask_size(), GFP_KERNEL, j);
> > > +			struct cpumask *mask = kzalloc(cpumask_size(), GFP_KERNEL);
> > >  			if (!mask)
> > >  				return;
> > >  
> > 
> > It's definitely better if we can allocate on the node, though, so perhaps 
> > do the same thing that I did in 
> > http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=133778739503111 by doing
> > kzalloc_node(..., node_online(j) ? j : NUMA_NO_NODE)?
> 
> This data isn't used overly much, only when rebuilding the sched
> domains, so its not performance critical. I only used per-node
> allocations because it seemed the right thing to do. If it doesn't work,
> I wouldn't bother with making it more complex.
> 

Ok, if you don't think these cpumasks need locality for performance, then

Acked-by: David Rientjes <rientjes@xxxxxxxxxx>
--
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/