On Mon, 19 Feb 2024 14:04:23 +0530 Donet Tom <donettom@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> --- a/mm/mempolicy.c > >> +++ b/mm/mempolicy.c > >> @@ -2526,7 +2526,7 @@ int mpol_misplaced(struct folio *folio, struct vm_area_struct *vma, > >> if (node_isset(curnid, pol->nodes)) > >> goto out; > >> z = first_zones_zonelist( > >> - node_zonelist(numa_node_id(), GFP_HIGHUSER), > >> + node_zonelist(thisnid, GFP_HIGHUSER), > >> gfp_zone(GFP_HIGHUSER), > >> &pol->nodes); > >> polnid = zone_to_nid(z->zone); > > int thisnid = cpu_to_node(thiscpu); > > > > Is there any dofference between numa_node_id() and > > cpu_to_node(raw_smp_processor_id())? And it it explicable that we're > > using one here and not the other? > > Hi Andrew > > Both numa_node_id() and cpu_to_node(raw_smp_processor_id()) return the current execution node id, > Since the current execution node is already fetched at the beginning (thisnid) we can reuse it instead of getting it again. Sure, but mine was a broader thought: why do we have both? Is one preferable and if so why?
