On Thu, 29 May 2014 16:01:55 -0700 (PDT) David Rientjes <rient...@google.com> 

> There are still three issues with this, two of which are only minor and 
> one that needs more thought:
>  (1) this doesn't affect only cpusets which the changelog indicates, it 
>      also bypasses mempolicies for GFP_DMA and GFP_DMA32 allocations since
>      the nodemask != NULL in the page allocator when there is an effective
>      mempolicy.  That may be precisely what you're trying to do (do the
>      same for mempolicies as you're doing for cpusets), but the comment 
>      now in the code specifically refers to cpusets.  Can you make a case
>      for the mempolicies exception as well?  Otherwise, we'll need to do
>       if (!nodemask && gfp_zone(gfp_mask) < policy_zone)
>               nodemask = &node_states[N_ONLINE];
> And the two minors:
>  (2) this should be &node_states[N_MEMORY], not &node_states[N_ONLINE] 
>      since memoryless nodes should not be included.  Note that
>      guarantee_online_mems() looks at N_MEMORY and
>      cpuset_current_mems_allowed is defined for N_MEMORY without
>      cpusets.
>  (3) it's unnecessary for this to be after the "retry_cpuset" label and
>      check the gfp mask again if we need to relook at the allowed cpuset
>      mask.

OK, thanks, I made the patch go away for now.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Reply via email to