linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
To: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Cc: yinghai@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, tj@kernel.org,
	torvalds@linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: nobootmem: Correct alloc_bootmem semantics.
Date: Thu, 3 May 2012 17:28:41 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120503152841.GA19918@cmpxchg.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120425.190034.632638679653622318.davem@davemloft.net>

On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 07:00:34PM -0400, David Miller wrote:
> From: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@kernel.org>
> Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2012 15:46:42 -0700
> 
> > On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 1:10 PM, David Miller <davem@davemloft.net> wrote:
> >> @@ -298,13 +298,19 @@ void * __init __alloc_bootmem_node(pg_data_t *pgdat, unsigned long size,
> >>        if (WARN_ON_ONCE(slab_is_available()))
> >>                return kzalloc_node(size, GFP_NOWAIT, pgdat->node_id);
> >>
> >> +again:
> >>        ptr = __alloc_memory_core_early(pgdat->node_id, size, align,
> >>                                         goal, -1ULL);
> >>        if (ptr)
> >>                return ptr;
> > 
> > If you want to be consistent to bootmem version.
> > 
> > again label should be here instead.
> 
> It is merely an artifact of implementation that the bootmem version
> doesn't try to respect the given node if the goal cannot be satisfied,
> and in fact I would classify that as a bug that needs to be fixed.
> 
> Therefore, I believe the bootmem case is what needs to be adjusted
> instead.

Now it does: node+goal, goal, node, anywhere

whereas the memblock version of __alloc_bootmem_node_nopanic() also
still does: node+goal, goal, anywhere

Your description suggests that the node should be higher prioritized
than the goal, which I understand as: node+goal, node, anywhere.

Which do we actually want?

  parent reply	other threads:[~2012-05-03 15:28 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-04-25 20:10 [PATCH] mm: nobootmem: Correct alloc_bootmem semantics David Miller
2012-04-25 20:12 ` Tejun Heo
2012-04-25 22:46 ` Yinghai Lu
2012-04-25 23:00   ` David Miller
2012-04-25 23:14     ` Yinghai Lu
2012-04-25 23:15       ` David Miller
2012-05-03 15:28     ` Johannes Weiner [this message]
2012-05-03 17:04       ` David Miller
2012-05-04  9:41         ` Johannes Weiner
2012-05-04 14:46           ` David Miller

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20120503152841.GA19918@cmpxchg.org \
    --to=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=tj@kernel.org \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=yinghai@kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body. 
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).