Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754387Ab1EDTR3 (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 May 2011 15:17:29 -0400 Received: from smtp-out.google.com ([216.239.44.51]:15911 "EHLO smtp-out.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754157Ab1EDTR2 (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 May 2011 15:17:28 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=google.com; s=beta; h=date:from:x-x-sender:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:message-id :references:user-agent:mime-version:content-type; b=o4Kp/ETnKqZryZzZTm1x1w5dGOBhNhIKBddDpSOFH8sYWrYb2krF2ewwAq81jcxpSk IkvLXP1UR9gSYqsL9lDQ== Date: Wed, 4 May 2011 12:17:22 -0700 (PDT) From: David Rientjes X-X-Sender: rientjes@chino.kir.corp.google.com To: Andi Kleen cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, Andi Kleen , Michal Hocko , Dave Hansen , Balbir Singh , Johannes Weiner Subject: Re: [PATCH] Allocate memory cgroup structures in local nodes In-Reply-To: <1304533058-18228-1-git-send-email-andi@firstfloor.org> Message-ID: References: <1304533058-18228-1-git-send-email-andi@firstfloor.org> User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (DEB 1167 2008-08-23) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-System-Of-Record: true Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2215 Lines: 59 On Wed, 4 May 2011, Andi Kleen wrote: > From: Andi Kleen > > [Andrew: since this is a regression and a very simple fix > could you still consider it for .39? Thanks] > Before that's considered, the order of the arguments to alloc_pages_exact_node() needs to be fixed. > dde79e005a769 added a regression that the memory cgroup data structures > all end up in node 0 because the first attempt at allocating them > would not pass in a node hint. Since the initialization runs on CPU #0 > it would all end up node 0. This is a problem on large memory systems, > where node 0 would lose a lot of memory. > > Change the alloc_pages_exact to alloc_pages_exact_node. This will > still fall back to other nodes if not enough memory is available. > The vmalloc_node() calls ensure that the nid is actually set in N_HIGH_MEMORY and fails otherwise (we don't fallback to using vmalloc()), so it looks like the failures for alloc_pages_exact_node() and vmalloc_node() would be different? Why do we want to fallback for one and not the other? > [RED-PEN: right now it would fall back first before trying > vmalloc_node. Probably not the best strategy ... But I left it like > that for now.] > > Reported-by: Doug Nelson > CC: Michal Hocko > Cc: Dave Hansen > Cc: Balbir Singh > Cc: Johannes Weiner > Signed-off-by: Andi Kleen > --- > mm/page_cgroup.c | 2 +- > 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/mm/page_cgroup.c b/mm/page_cgroup.c > index 9905501..1f4e20f 100644 > --- a/mm/page_cgroup.c > +++ b/mm/page_cgroup.c > @@ -134,7 +134,7 @@ static void *__init_refok alloc_page_cgroup(size_t size, int nid) > { > void *addr = NULL; > > - addr = alloc_pages_exact(size, GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_NOWARN); > + addr = alloc_pages_exact_node(nid, size, GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_NOWARN); > if (addr) > return addr; > -- 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/