On Feb 19, 2008 10:27 PM, Ingo Molnar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> * Yinghai Lu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > > > can you check the 5/8? that will make sure every struct device get
> > > > numa_node get assigned.
> > >
> > > Why do we need to bother with that if the parent will have the
> > >
* Yinghai Lu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > can you check the 5/8? that will make sure every struct device get
> > > numa_node get assigned.
> >
> > Why do we need to bother with that if the parent will have the
> > necessary information for us here?
>
> less code?
>
> or some kind of usb o
On Feb 19, 2008 2:55 PM, David Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> From: Yinghai Lu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2008 11:42:48 -0800
>
> > On Tuesday 19 February 2008 03:41:10 am David Miller wrote:
> > > From: Ingo Molnar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2008 12:21:46 +0100
>
From: Yinghai Lu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2008 11:42:48 -0800
> On Tuesday 19 February 2008 03:41:10 am David Miller wrote:
> > From: Ingo Molnar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2008 12:21:46 +0100
> >
> > >
> > > * Yinghai Lu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > > str
On Feb 19, 2008 11:42 AM, Yinghai Lu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tuesday 19 February 2008 03:41:10 am David Miller wrote:
> > From: Ingo Molnar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2008 12:21:46 +0100
> >
> > >
> > > * Yinghai Lu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > > struct sk_buff *__
On Tuesday 19 February 2008 03:41:10 am David Miller wrote:
> From: Ingo Molnar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2008 12:21:46 +0100
>
> >
> > * Yinghai Lu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > struct sk_buff *__netdev_alloc_skb(struct net_device *dev,
> > > unsigned int length,
From: Ingo Molnar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2008 12:21:46 +0100
>
> * Yinghai Lu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > struct sk_buff *__netdev_alloc_skb(struct net_device *dev,
> > unsigned int length, gfp_t gfp_mask)
> > {
> > - int node = dev->dev.parent ? dev_to_node(d
* Yinghai Lu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> struct sk_buff *__netdev_alloc_skb(struct net_device *dev,
> unsigned int length, gfp_t gfp_mask)
> {
> - int node = dev->dev.parent ? dev_to_node(dev->dev.parent) : -1;
> + int node = dev_to_node(&dev->dev);
i think this is a fix
Signed-off-by: Yinghai Lu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Index: linux-2.6/net/core/skbuff.c
===
--- linux-2.6.orig/net/core/skbuff.c
+++ linux-2.6/net/core/skbuff.c
@@ -252,7 +252,7 @@ nodata:
struct sk_buff *__netdev_alloc_skb(struct net_devi
9 matches
Mail list logo