Gregory Price <gregory.price@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> On Mon, Jan 22, 2024 at 11:54:34PM -0500, Gregory Price wrote:
>> >
>> > Can the above code be simplified as something like below?
>> >
>> > resume_node = prev_node;
> --- resume_weight = 0;
> +++ resume_weight = weights[node];
>> > for (...) {
>> > ...
>> > }
>> >
>>
>> I'll take another look at it, but this logic is annoying because of the
>> corner case: me->il_prev can be NUMA_NO_NODE or an actual numa node.
>>
>
> After a quick look, as long as no one objects to (me->il_prev) remaining
> NUMA_NO_NODE
MAX_NUMNODES-1 ?
> while having a weight assigned to pol->wil.cur_weight,
I think that it is OK.
And, IIUC, pol->wil.cur_weight can be 0, as in
weighted_interleave_nodes(), if it's 0, it will be assigned to default
weight for the node.
> then
> this looks like it can be simplified as above.
>
> I don't think it's harmful, but i'll have to take a quick look at what
> happens on rebind to make sure we don't have a stale weight.
Make sense.
--
Best Regards,
Huang, Ying
