lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [Aug]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [RFC 1/2] slub: Avoid trying to allocate memory on offline nodes
From
Date
Hi,

On 08/02/2018 09:23 AM, Christopher Lameter wrote:
> On Wed, 1 Aug 2018, Jeremy Linton wrote:
>
>> diff --git a/mm/slub.c b/mm/slub.c
>> index 51258eff4178..e03719bac1e2 100644
>> --- a/mm/slub.c
>> +++ b/mm/slub.c
>> @@ -2519,6 +2519,8 @@ static void *___slab_alloc(struct kmem_cache *s, gfp_t gfpflags, int node,
>> if (unlikely(!node_match(page, searchnode))) {
>> stat(s, ALLOC_NODE_MISMATCH);
>> deactivate_slab(s, page, c->freelist, c);
>> + if (!node_online(searchnode))
>> + node = NUMA_NO_NODE;
>> goto new_slab;
>> }
>> }
>>
>
> Would it not be better to implement this check in the page allocator?
> There is also the issue of how to fallback to the nearest node.

Possibly? Falling back to the nearest node though, should be handled if
memory-less nodes is enabled, which in the problematic case isn't.

>
> NUMA_NO_NODE should fallback to the current memory allocation policy but
> it seems by inserting it here you would end up just with the default node
> for the processor.

I picked this spot (compared to 2/2) because a number of paths are
funneling through here, and in this case it shouldn't be a very hot path.

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-08-03 05:14    [W:0.064 / U:2.752 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site