On Wed 03-04-13 12:00:12, Robin Holt wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 03, 2013 at 04:02:47PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > On Tue 02-04-13 21:43:44, Robin Holt wrote:
> > [...]
> > > diff --git a/mm/hugetlb.c b/mm/hugetlb.c
> > > index ca9a7c6..7683f6a 100644
> > > --- a/mm/hugetlb.c
> > > +++ b/mm/hugetlb.c
> > > @@ -1185,7 +1185,7 @@ int __weak alloc_bootmem_huge_page(struct hstate *h)
> > > while (nr_nodes) {
> > > void *addr;
> > >
> > > - addr = __alloc_bootmem_node_nopanic(
> > > + addr = __alloc_bootmem_node_nopanic_notzeroed(
> > > NODE_DATA(hstate_next_node_to_alloc(h,
> > > &node_states[N_MEMORY])),
> > > huge_page_size(h), huge_page_size(h), 0);
> >
> > Ohh, and powerpc seems to have its own opinion how to allocate huge
> > pages. See arch/powerpc/mm/hugetlbpage.c
>
> Do I need to address their allocations? Can I leave that part of the
> changes as something powerpc can address if they are affected by this?
I mentioned powerpc basically because I encountered it as the only
alternative implementation of alloc_bootmem_huge_page. I haven't checked
how it does the job and now that I am looking closer it uses memblock
allocator so it would need a separate fix.
I guess you are right saying that this should be handled when the need
arises.
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>