On Thu, 29 May 2014 16:01:55 -0700 (PDT) David Rientjes <rientjes@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > There are still three issues with this, two of which are only minor and > one that needs more thought: > > (1) this doesn't affect only cpusets which the changelog indicates, it > also bypasses mempolicies for GFP_DMA and GFP_DMA32 allocations since > the nodemask != NULL in the page allocator when there is an effective > mempolicy. That may be precisely what you're trying to do (do the > same for mempolicies as you're doing for cpusets), but the comment > now in the code specifically refers to cpusets. Can you make a case > for the mempolicies exception as well? Otherwise, we'll need to do > > if (!nodemask && gfp_zone(gfp_mask) < policy_zone) > nodemask = &node_states[N_ONLINE]; > > And the two minors: > > (2) this should be &node_states[N_MEMORY], not &node_states[N_ONLINE] > since memoryless nodes should not be included. Note that > guarantee_online_mems() looks at N_MEMORY and > cpuset_current_mems_allowed is defined for N_MEMORY without > cpusets. > > (3) it's unnecessary for this to be after the "retry_cpuset" label and > check the gfp mask again if we need to relook at the allowed cpuset > mask. OK, thanks, I made the patch go away for now. -- 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>