Re: [PATCH] fix for-loop in sn_hwperf_geoid_to_cnode()

From: Dean Roe <>
Date: 2006-03-07 03:28:37
On Fri, Mar 03, 2006 at 01:52:56PM -0800, Luck, Tony wrote:
> Any ideas on the relative proportions of nodes with/without memory?
> Should we consider renaming "for_each_node()" as "for_each_mnode()"
> (meaning only scan nodes with memory).  That would stop mm/slab.c
> from allocating useless arraycaches for nodes with no memory.  But
> this is turning into a discussion that would have to happen on LKML.

Memory nodes are far more prevalent than IO nodes.  I don't think it
is worth changing this, at least not at this time.

> Perhaps you could add an /*ACPI3.0-FIXME*/ comment (or some such)
> to the loop in Dean's patch as a reminder to fix this later?  That
> might also serve as a clue to any janitor that tries to clean
> up this code back to using "for_each_node()" (and a reminder to
> me to not take such a patch).

I'll add a comment and send out a new patch in a few minutes.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ia64" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Received on Tue Mar 07 03:31:33 2006

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 2006-03-07 03:31:42 EST