Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751606AbXBMSwB (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Feb 2007 13:52:01 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751608AbXBMSwB (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Feb 2007 13:52:01 -0500 Received: from mailhub.hp.com ([192.151.27.10]:49878 "EHLO mailhub.hp.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751606AbXBMSwA (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Feb 2007 13:52:00 -0500 From: "Bob Picco" Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2007 13:51:57 -0500 To: Andi Kleen Cc: "Martin J. Bligh" , KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki , LKML , Andrew Morton , Christoph Lameter , bob.picco@hp.com Subject: Re: [RFC] [PATCH] more support for memory-less-node. Message-ID: <20070213185157.GO17678@localhost> References: <20070213155736.1131d46a.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> <200702131845.05913.ak@suse.de> <45D1FF43.9050800@mbligh.org> <200702131918.45885.ak@suse.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200702131918.45885.ak@suse.de> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1861 Lines: 47 Andi Kleen wrote: [Tue Feb 13 2007, 01:18:45PM EST] > > > I wasn't suggesting having NULL pointers for pgdats, if that's what you > > mean. > > That is what started the original thread at least. Can happen on some > ia64 platforms. I don't believe there is a NULL pgdat. The code for memory less nodes in ia64 discontig.c allocates the memory less nodes pgdat from the best memory node candidate. If there is a NULL pgdat, then it's a bug. Instead for memory less nodes you don't have any present pages. I thought the bug was because the process wanted to bind on just one memoryless node and MPOL_BIND didn't handle that correctly and return an error to the process. bob > > > Just nodes with no memory in them, the pgdat would still be there. > > pgdat = struct node, except everything's badly named. > > Ok those can happen even on x86-64, mostly because it's possible > to fill up a node early during boot up with bootmem and then > it's effectively empty. > > [there is even still a open bug when this happens on node 0] > > Handling out of memory here of course has to be always done. > > Just NULL pointers in core data structures are evil. But I'm glad we > agree here. > > Now if it's better to set up a empty node or use a nearby node > for a memory less cpu can be further discussed. I still think > I lean towards the later. > > -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/ - 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/