Re: [RFC PATCH 2/3] topology: support node_numa_mem() for determining the fallback node

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

To: Christoph Lameter <cl@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 2/3] topology: support node_numa_mem() for determining the fallback node
From: Nishanth Aravamudan <nacc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 7 Feb 2014 13:38:55 -0800
Authentication-results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of nacc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx designates 32.97.110.149 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=nacc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@xxxxxxx>, David Rientjes <rientjes@xxxxxxxxxx>, Han Pingtian <hanpt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Pekka Enberg <penberg@xxxxxxxxxx>, Linux Memory Management List <linux-mm@xxxxxxxxx>, Paul Mackerras <paulus@xxxxxxxxx>, Anton Blanchard <anton@xxxxxxxxx>, Matt Mackall <mpm@xxxxxxxxxxx>, linuxppc-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Wanpeng Li <liwanp@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Delivered-to: linux-mm-outgoing@xxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <alpine.DEB.2.10.1402071245040.20246@nuc>
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)

On 07.02.2014 [12:51:07 -0600], Christoph Lameter wrote:
> Here is a draft of a patch to make this work with memoryless nodes.

Hi Christoph, this should be tested instead of Joonsoo's patch 2 (and 3)?

Thanks,
Nish

--
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>

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [RFC PATCH 2/3] topology: support node_numa_mem() for determining the fallback node
  - From: Joonsoo Kim

References:
- Re: [PATCH] slub: Don't throw away partial remote slabs if there is no local memory
  - From: Nishanth Aravamudan
- [RFC PATCH 1/3] slub: search partial list on numa_mem_id(), instead of numa_node_id()
  - From: Joonsoo Kim
- [RFC PATCH 2/3] topology: support node_numa_mem() for determining the fallback node
  - From: Joonsoo Kim
- Re: [RFC PATCH 2/3] topology: support node_numa_mem() for determining the fallback node
  - From: David Rientjes
- Re: [RFC PATCH 2/3] topology: support node_numa_mem() for determining the fallback node
  - From: Joonsoo Kim
- Re: [RFC PATCH 2/3] topology: support node_numa_mem() for determining the fallback node
  - From: David Rientjes
- Re: [RFC PATCH 2/3] topology: support node_numa_mem() for determining the fallback node
  - From: Joonsoo Kim
- Re: [RFC PATCH 2/3] topology: support node_numa_mem() for determining the fallback node
  - From: Christoph Lameter
- Re: [RFC PATCH 2/3] topology: support node_numa_mem() for determining the fallback node
  - From: Christoph Lameter

Prev by Date: Re: [patch] drop_caches: add some documentation and info message
Next by Date: Re: [PATCH] mm/memory-failure.c: move refcount only in !MF_COUNT_INCREASED
Previous by thread: Re: [RFC PATCH 2/3] topology: support node_numa_mem() for determining the fallback node
Next by thread: Re: [RFC PATCH 2/3] topology: support node_numa_mem() for determining the fallback node
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

[Index of Archives] [Linux ARM Kernel] [Linux ARM] [Linux Omap] [Fedora ARM] [IETF Annouce] [Bugtraq] [Linux] [Linux OMAP] [Linux MIPS] [ECOS] [Asterisk Internet PBX] [Linux API]