On 4/25/25 19:35, Christoph Lameter (Ampere) wrote:
> On Fri, 25 Apr 2025, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
>
>> @@ -5924,8 +5948,15 @@ void slab_free(struct kmem_cache *s, struct slab
>> *slab, void *object,
>> if (unlikely(!slab_free_hook(s, object, slab_want_init_on_free(s),
>> false)))
>> return;
>>
>> - if (!s->cpu_sheaves || !free_to_pcs(s, object))
>> - do_slab_free(s, slab, object, object, 1, addr);
>> + if (s->cpu_sheaves) {
>> + if (likely(!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_NUMA) ||
>> + slab_nid(slab) == numa_node_id())) {
>
> Ah. ok this removes remote object freeing to the pcs.
>
> numa_mem_id() is needed to support memory less numa nodes.
Ah right those... will fix, thanks.
>> + free_to_pcs(s, object);
>> + return;
>> + }
>> + }
>> +
>> + do_slab_free(s, slab, object, object, 1, addr);
>> }
>>
>> #ifdef CONFIG_MEMCG
>>
>>
