On Fri, 27 Feb 2015, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
> > Do you see any issues with either patch 1/2 or patch 2/2 besides the
> > s/GFP_TRANSHUGE/GFP_THISNODE/ that is necessary on the changelog?
>
> Well, my point is, what if the node we are explicitly trying to allocate
> hugepage on, is in fact not allowed by our cpuset? This could happen in the
> page
> fault case, no? Although in a weird configuration when process can (and really
> gets scheduled to run) on a node where it is not allowed to allocate from...
>
If the process is running a node that is not allowed by the cpuset, then
alloc_hugepage_vma() now fails with VM_FAULT_FALLBACK. That was the
intended policy change of commit 077fcf116c8c ("mm/thp: allocate
transparent hugepages on local node").
[ alloc_hugepage_vma() should probably be using numa_mem_id() instead for
memoryless node platforms. ]
_______________________________________________
dev mailing list
dev@openvswitch.org
http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
