From: Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de>
To: "Martin J. Bligh" <mbligh@mbligh.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] [PATCH] more support for memory-less-node.
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2007 18:45:05 +0100
User-Agent: KMail/1.9.5
Cc: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>,
       LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>,
       Christoph Lameter <clameter@sgi.com>, bob.picco@hp.com
References: <20070213155736.1131d46a.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> <45D1F0B1.3020508@mbligh.org>
In-Reply-To: <45D1F0B1.3020508@mbligh.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-Id: <200702131845.05913.ak@suse.de>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 826
Lines: 19


> Your description of the node is correct, it's an arbitrary container of
> one or more resources. Not only is this definition flexible, it's also
> very useful, for memory hotplug, odd types of NUMA boxes, etc.

I must disagree here. Special cases are always dangerous especially
if they are hard to regression test. I made this discovery the hard
way on x86-64 ... It's best to eliminate them in the first place,
otherwise they will later come back and bite you when you don't expect it.

Adding NULL tests all over mm for this would seem like a clear case
of this to me.

-Andi
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/