On Thu, 28 Apr 2011 23:17:15 +0900 (JST)
KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> NUMA_NO_NODE and numa_node_id() are different meanings. NUMA_NO_NODE
> is obviously recomended fallback.
>
> Signed-off-by: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> lib/cpumask.c | 2 +-
> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/lib/cpumask.c b/lib/cpumask.c
> index 4f6425d..af3e581 100644
> --- a/lib/cpumask.c
> +++ b/lib/cpumask.c
> @@ -131,7 +131,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(zalloc_cpumask_var_node);
> */
> bool alloc_cpumask_var(cpumask_var_t *mask, gfp_t flags)
> {
> - return alloc_cpumask_var_node(mask, flags, numa_node_id());
> + return alloc_cpumask_var_node(mask, flags, NUMA_NO_NODE);
> }
> EXPORT_SYMBOL(alloc_cpumask_var);
>
So effectively this will replace numa_node_id() with numa_mem_id(),
yes? What runtime effects might this have?
--
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/ .
Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>