On Thu, 10 Sep 2009 16:17:22 -0700 (PDT) David Rientjes <rientjes@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, 10 Sep 2009, Andrew Morton wrote: > > > alloc_nodemask_of_node() has no callers, so I can think of a good fix > > for these problems. If it _did_ have a caller then I might ask "can't > > we fix this by moving alloc_nodemask_of_node() into the .c file". But > > it doesn't so I can't. > > > > It gets a caller in patch 5 of the series in set_max_huge_pages(). ooh, there it is. So alloc_nodemask_of_node() could be moved into mm/hugetlb.c. > My early criticism of both alloc_nodemask_of_node() and > alloc_nodemask_of_mempolicy() was that for small CONFIG_NODES_SHIFT (say, > 6 or less, which covers all defconfigs except ia64), it is perfectly > reasonable to allocate 64 bytes on the stack in the caller. Spose so. But this stuff is only called when userspace reconfigures via sysfs, so it'll be low bandwidth (one sincerely hopes). -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-numa" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
