All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
To: Feng Tang <feng.tang@intel.com>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>,
	David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
	Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>,
	Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@oracle.com>,
	Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org>,
	Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>,
	Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>,
	Ben Widawsky <ben.widawsky@intel.com>,
	Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>,
	Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 07/13] mm/mempolicy: handle MPOL_PREFERRED_MANY like BIND
Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2021 15:01:55 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <YHbnwyITOehcVn0S@dhcp22.suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1615952410-36895-8-git-send-email-feng.tang@intel.com>

On Wed 17-03-21 11:40:04, Feng Tang wrote:
> From: Ben Widawsky <ben.widawsky@intel.com>
> 
> Begin the real plumbing for handling this new policy. Now that the
> internal representation for preferred nodes and bound nodes is the same,
> and we can envision what multiple preferred nodes will behave like,
> there are obvious places where we can simply reuse the bind behavior.
> 
> In v1 of this series, the moral equivalent was:
> "mm: Finish handling MPOL_PREFERRED_MANY". Like that, this attempts to
> implement the easiest spots for the new policy. Unlike that, this just
> reuses BIND.

No, this is a bug step back. I think we really want to treat this as
PREFERRED. It doesn't have much to do with the BIND semantic at all.
At this stage there should be 2 things remaining - syscalls plumbing and
2 pass allocation request (optimistic preferred nodes restricted and
fallback to all nodes).
-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs

  reply	other threads:[~2021-04-14 13:02 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 33+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-03-17  3:39 [PATCH v4 00/13] Introduced multi-preference mempolicy Feng Tang
2021-03-17  3:39 ` [PATCH v4 01/13] mm/mempolicy: Add comment for missing LOCAL Feng Tang
2021-03-17  3:39 ` [PATCH v4 02/13] mm/mempolicy: convert single preferred_node to full nodemask Feng Tang
2021-04-14 12:17   ` Michal Hocko
2021-03-17  3:40 ` [PATCH v4 03/13] mm/mempolicy: Add MPOL_PREFERRED_MANY for multiple preferred nodes Feng Tang
2021-04-14 12:50   ` Michal Hocko
2021-04-20  7:16     ` Feng Tang
2021-05-13  7:23       ` Feng Tang
2021-05-13  7:25       ` [RFC PATCH 2/2] mempolicy: kill MPOL_F_LOCAL bit Feng Tang
2021-05-13 13:55         ` Andi Kleen
2021-03-17  3:40 ` [PATCH v4 04/13] mm/mempolicy: allow preferred code to take a nodemask Feng Tang
2021-04-14 12:55   ` Michal Hocko
2021-04-19  8:49     ` Feng Tang
2021-03-17  3:40 ` [PATCH v4 05/13] mm/mempolicy: refactor rebind code for PREFERRED_MANY Feng Tang
2021-04-14 12:57   ` Michal Hocko
2021-03-17  3:40 ` [PATCH v4 06/13] mm/mempolicy: kill v.preferred_nodes Feng Tang
2021-04-14 12:58   ` Michal Hocko
2021-03-17  3:40 ` [PATCH v4 07/13] mm/mempolicy: handle MPOL_PREFERRED_MANY like BIND Feng Tang
2021-04-14 13:01   ` Michal Hocko [this message]
2021-03-17  3:40 ` [PATCH v4 08/13] mm/mempolicy: Create a page allocator for policy Feng Tang
2021-04-14 13:08   ` Michal Hocko
2021-04-15  8:17     ` Feng Tang
2021-03-17  3:40 ` [PATCH v4 09/13] mm/mempolicy: Thread allocation for many preferred Feng Tang
2021-03-17  3:40 ` [PATCH v4 10/13] mm/mempolicy: VMA " Feng Tang
2021-04-14 13:14   ` Michal Hocko
2021-03-17  3:40 ` [PATCH v4 11/13] mm/mempolicy: huge-page " Feng Tang
2021-03-17  7:19   ` kernel test robot
2021-03-17  7:19     ` kernel test robot
2021-04-14 13:25   ` Michal Hocko
2021-04-15  7:41     ` Feng Tang
2021-03-17  3:40 ` [PATCH v4 12/13] mm/mempolicy: Advertise new MPOL_PREFERRED_MANY Feng Tang
2021-03-17  3:40 ` [PATCH v4 13/13] mem/mempolicy: unify mpol_new_preferred() and mpol_new_preferred_many() Feng Tang
2021-04-14 11:21 ` [PATCH v4 00/13] Introduced multi-preference mempolicy Michal Hocko

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=YHbnwyITOehcVn0S@dhcp22.suse.cz \
    --to=mhocko@suse.com \
    --cc=aarcange@redhat.com \
    --cc=ak@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=ben.widawsky@intel.com \
    --cc=dan.j.williams@intel.com \
    --cc=dave.hansen@intel.com \
    --cc=feng.tang@intel.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=mgorman@techsingularity.net \
    --cc=mike.kravetz@oracle.com \
    --cc=rdunlap@infradead.org \
    --cc=rientjes@google.com \
    --cc=vbabka@suse.cz \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body. 
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.