From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755961AbbAWUUJ (ORCPT ); Fri, 23 Jan 2015 15:20:09 -0500 Received: from resqmta-ch2-05v.sys.comcast.net ([69.252.207.37]:34923 "EHLO resqmta-ch2-05v.sys.comcast.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754585AbbAWUUH (ORCPT ); Fri, 23 Jan 2015 15:20:07 -0500 Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2015 14:20:03 -0600 (CST) From: Christoph Lameter X-X-Sender: cl@gentwo.org To: Johannes Weiner cc: Guenter Roeck , akpm@linux-foundation.org, mm-commits@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-next@vger.kernel.org, sfr@canb.auug.org.au, mhocko@suse.cz Subject: Re: mmotm 2015-01-22-15-04: qemu failure due to 'mm: memcontrol: remove unnecessary soft limit tree node test' In-Reply-To: <20150123141817.GA22926@phnom.home.cmpxchg.org> Message-ID: References: <54c1822d.RtdGfWPekQVAw8Ly%akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20150123050802.GB22751@roeck-us.net> <20150123141817.GA22926@phnom.home.cmpxchg.org> Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, 23 Jan 2015, Johannes Weiner wrote: > struct mem_cgroup_tree_per_node *rtpn; > struct mem_cgroup_tree_per_zone *rtpz; > - int tmp, node, zone; > + int node, zone; > > for_each_node(node) { Do for_each_online_node(node) { instead? > - tmp = node; > - if (!node_state(node, N_NORMAL_MEMORY)) > - tmp = -1; > - rtpn = kzalloc_node(sizeof(*rtpn), GFP_KERNEL, tmp); > + rtpn = kzalloc_node(sizeof(*rtpn), GFP_KERNEL, node); > BUG_ON(!rtpn); > > soft_limit_tree.rb_tree_per_node[node] = rtpn; > > -- > > Is the assumption of this patch wrong? Does the specified node have > to be online for the fallback to work? > > Thanks >