On Fri, 2010-05-21 at 13:44 +0900, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote: > On Fri, 21 May 2010 10:55:12 +1000 > Stephen Rothwell <sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > Hi Andrew, > > > > On Thu, 20 May 2010 13:43:59 -0700 Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > > --- a/mm/percpu.c > > > > +++ b/mm/percpu.c > > > > @@ -714,13 +714,29 @@ static int pcpu_alloc_pages(struct pcpu_chunk *chunk, > > > > > > In linux-next, Tejun has gone and moved pcpu_alloc_pages() into the new > > > mm/percpu-vm.c. So either > > > > This has gone into Linus' tree today ... > > > > Hmm, a comment here. > > Recently, Lee Schermerhorn developed > > numa-introduce-numa_mem_id-effective-local-memory-node-id-fix2.patch > > Then, you can use cpu_to_mem() instead of cpu_to_node() to find the > nearest available node. > I don't check cpu_to_mem() is synchronized with NUMA hotplug but > using cpu_to_mem() rather than adding > = > > + if ((nid == -1) || > + !(node_zonelist(nid, GFP_KERNEL)->_zonerefs->zone)) > + nid = numa_node_id(); > + > == > > is better. Kame-san, all: numa_mem_id() and cpu_to_mem() are not supported [yet] on x86 because x86 hides all memoryless nodes and moves cpus to "nearby" [for some definition thereof] nodes with memory. So, these interfaces just return numa_node_id() and cpu_to_node() for x86. Perhaps that will change someday... Lee > > Thanks, > -Kame > > -- > To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in > the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxx For more info on Linux MM, > see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . > Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a> -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxx For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>