Hi Nishanth and Alexander, Thanks for review, will update the comments in next version. Regards! Gerry On 2014/7/22 5:09, Nishanth Aravamudan wrote: > On 21.07.2014 [12:53:33 -0700], Alexander Duyck wrote: >> I do agree the description should probably be changed. There shouldn't be >> any panics involved, only a performance impact as it will be reallocating >> always if it is on a node with no memory. > > Yep, thanks for the review. > >> My intention on this was to make certain that the memory used is from the >> closest node possible. As such I believe this change likely honours that. > > Absolutely, just wanted to make it explicit that it's not a functional > fix, just a performance fix (presuming this shows up at all on systems > that have memoryless NUMA nodes). > > I'd suggest an update to the comments, as well. > > 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>