On 24.02.2014 [13:54:35 -0600], Christoph Lameter wrote: > On Mon, 24 Feb 2014, Joonsoo Kim wrote: > > > > It will not common get there because of the tracking. Instead a per cpu > > > object will be used. > > > > get_partial_node() always fails even if there are some partial slab on > > > > memoryless node's neareast node. > > > > > > Correct and that leads to a page allocator action whereupon the node will > > > be marked as empty. > > > > Why do we need to request to a page allocator if there is partial slab? > > Checking whether node is memoryless or not is really easy, so we don't need > > to skip this. To skip this is suboptimal solution. > > The page allocator action is also used to determine to which other node we > should fall back if the node is empty. So we need to call the page > allocator when the per cpu slab is exhaused with the node of the > memoryless node to get memory from the proper fallback node. Where do we stand with these patches? I feel like no resolution was really found... 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>