From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932456Ab2CWBVN (ORCPT ); Thu, 22 Mar 2012 21:21:13 -0400 Received: from lennier.cc.vt.edu ([198.82.162.213]:57724 "EHLO lennier.cc.vt.edu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932240Ab2CWBVL (ORCPT ); Thu, 22 Mar 2012 21:21:11 -0400 X-Mailer: exmh version 2.7.2 01/07/2005 with nmh-1.4-dev To: lwoodman@redhat.com Cc: Christoph Lameter , KOSAKI Motohiro , linux-mm@kvack.org, Linux Kernel Mailing List , Andrew Morton , Rik van Riel , Motohiro Kosaki Subject: Re: [PATCH -mm] do_migrate_pages() calls migrate_to_node() even if task is already on a correct node In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 22 Mar 2012 16:14:04 -0400." <4F6B880C.7000805@redhat.com> From: Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu References: <4F6B6BFF.1020701@redhat.com> <4F6B7358.60800@gmail.com> <4F6B7854.1040203@redhat.com> <40300.1332445016@turing-police.cc.vt.edu> <4F6B880C.7000805@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="==_Exmh_1332465660_1929P"; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2012 21:21:00 -0400 Message-ID: <3879.1332465660@turing-police.cc.vt.edu> X-Mirapoint-Received-SPF: 198.82.161.152 auth3.smtp.vt.edu Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu 2 pass X-Junkmail-Status: score=10/50, host=vivi.cc.vt.edu X-Junkmail-Signature-Raw: score=unknown, refid=str=0001.0A02020B.4F6BCFFF.0049,ss=1,re=0.000,fgs=0, ip=0.0.0.0, so=2011-07-25 19:15:43, dmn=2011-05-27 18:58:46, mode=single engine X-Junkmail-IWF: false Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org --==_Exmh_1332465660_1929P Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii On Thu, 22 Mar 2012 16:14:04 -0400, Larry Woodman said: > On 03/22/2012 03:36 PM, Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu wrote: > > On Thu, 22 Mar 2012 15:07:00 -0400, Larry Woodman said: > > > >> So to be clear on this, in that case the intention would be move 3 to 4, > >> 4 to 5 and 5 to 6 > >> to keep the node ordering the same? > > Would it make more sense to do 5->6, 4->5, 3->4? If we move stuff > > from 3 to 4 before clearing the old 4 stuff out, it might get crowded? > > > Yes, I didnt try to imply the order in which pages were moved just > the additional moving necessary. Oh, OK.. :) --==_Exmh_1332465660_1929P Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Exmh version 2.5 07/13/2001 iQIVAwUBT2vP/AdmEQWDXROgAQIsnxAAumBOMgzOwiTT4rJs98vgUg8KKeo6ciYc 9thofQqjYmfJnHc/7nmhJSQASfUYLVHh16tL47ky+mazjYZgKCXY0Tfp7S1JXZX4 n/OV7AX1o2IezoufzrIFcBtEMh6UxwzR6DYifqBCgem6YBbePvBlCxKfve0Arxo3 QPoyxl+OYEh35SUXZFVDHzKuhX3NRxMsRaS2HMrGpeKxj7gLkovr6iDTGemDYvyU sCGBpw8IRpUnkxcGXz/LFaf9MIenVEIeyZIW+ZYEqDzKbl3LYNiwWz66xzUhv4lw /hoIz307L3Cw445C0vzBXQDCeXLDzoZ8A/c8bpvWItb4c2z9byeF/WZprW4I6j8z aE1EUBicrdQQM9M2h8nhAe7bck+Zkl2onVtrLGZbVqcO6JQdGrxsnrcRr4B1Go1p ASsfGMqjWK6Fj3dFQpz6wgyL9mMMoIGOwRFFDMD6QrTx5Xlr41JW/dOTNIiBBqvw NBJ7u9UzAPoceefwfnzt95mwUlcGI7mWHzgpNN/9NK6fgJ2ukBE70/Q0TV68EcbH 2bBxEd+B6HlNcQQ+lt82EGLMocZ6gpnBF/W2dxJ7T2X87q0mhhQ2LuDb7QSe6+vs tCA4VQL6AHA5E8tLOMlBkiyHfb8VR3rarN+/nIbBhyLQieiI6oqAJ552kVKhMRbn CsxnZJWsTwA= =8fMF -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --==_Exmh_1332465660_1929P--