lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2006]   [Jan]   [26]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [patch 3/9] mempool - Make mempools NUMA aware
Christoph Lameter wrote:
> On Thu, 26 Jan 2006, Matthew Dobson wrote:
>
>
>>Not all requests for memory from a specific node are performance
>>enhancements, some are for correctness. With large machines, especially as
>
>
> alloc_pages_node and friends do not guarantee allocation on that specific
> node. That argument for "correctness" is bogus.

alloc_pages_node() does not guarantee allocation on a specific node, but
calling __alloc_pages() with a specific nodelist would.


>>>You do not need this....
>>
>>I do not agree...
>
>
> There is no way that you would need this patch.

My goal was to not change the behavior of the slab allocator when inserting
a mempool-backed allocator "under" it. Without support for at least
*requesting* allocations from a specific node when allocating from a
mempool, this would change how the slab allocator works. That would be
bad. The slab allocator now does not guarantee that, for example, a
kmalloc_node() request is satisfied by memory from the requested node, but
it does at least TRY. Without adding mempool_alloc_node() then I would
never be able to even TRY to satisfy a mempool-backed kmalloc_node()
request from the correct node. I believe that would constitute an
unacceptable breakage from normal, documented behavior. So, I *do* need
this patch.

-Matt
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2006-01-27 00:26    [W:1.035 / U:0.388 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site