On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 12:02:33PM +0530, Srikar Dronamraju wrote:
> * Mel Gorman <mgorman@xxxxxxx> [2013-06-26 15:38:03]:
> > @@ -831,9 +837,13 @@ void task_numa_fault(int node, int pages, bool migrated)
> > if (unlikely(!p->numa_faults)) {
> > int size = sizeof(*p->numa_faults) * nr_node_ids;
> >
> > - p->numa_faults = kzalloc(size, GFP_KERNEL);
> > + /* numa_faults and numa_faults_buffer share the allocation */
> > + p->numa_faults = kzalloc(size * 2, GFP_KERNEL);
>
> Instead of allocating buffer to hold the current faults, cant we pass
> the nr of pages and node information (and probably migrate) to
> task_numa_placement()?.
I'm afraid I don't get your question; there's more storage required than
just the arguments.
> Why should task_struct be passed as an argument to task_numa_placement().
> It seems it always will be current.
Customary for parts -- motivated by the fact that usage of current
is/can be more expensive than passing an argument.
--
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>