From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.1 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DEADEC43142 for ; Thu, 2 Aug 2018 17:26:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9670A2098A for ; Thu, 2 Aug 2018 17:26:17 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="bkIb1cwp" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 9670A2098A Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1732280AbeHBTSU (ORCPT ); Thu, 2 Aug 2018 15:18:20 -0400 Received: from mail-qt0-f193.google.com ([209.85.216.193]:37225 "EHLO mail-qt0-f193.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1730217AbeHBTSU (ORCPT ); Thu, 2 Aug 2018 15:18:20 -0400 Received: by mail-qt0-f193.google.com with SMTP id n6-v6so3197461qtl.4 for ; Thu, 02 Aug 2018 10:26:15 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=KwYD+47x7qvQTWci8ElMEZISbIN/EuE4/PSXuYpk0bc=; b=bkIb1cwpW0Q8ZzP+wa4++ypiYKb/cXKBE+8rTAIqJqTG4ZuJb/3nDz+h/qW9LawGjl 3SI47Jh8SyLuCRCQCEloPzZQ1nnouG+F+OGc0NIaYY3z/PaxgouI16dULRmoOLkxIWMc BhOevJdWjnHCMZ01NApNJKUyvdUYZaNzuVIRxEUCm8yZ3NzvgY+ZDQo6y+0e4WiD5UBn wFo5iyVT2wPwoRhKxfRQrGiNmIaXAQiSOg7NlTNjqHoo+x/bOkgN6jwsUaVkPxjsCqHG 7FgD9Q7bujKAFDsoIt1ve/oXmcNv4dmeAF1CGeoKONK2UOGUo+S8JgyC95iCrZOAfvty wsxQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=KwYD+47x7qvQTWci8ElMEZISbIN/EuE4/PSXuYpk0bc=; b=T0jmlNkr53Rfh10931+jTtPt5u1gi2jWYvKqwO3Dt0DdPL+GG6YwGRnnmK4ZkaIvUs TrInwI6kp7BEjYBER1WB0Kpp4uWzHCCrfkEMphHxkGAQ8phWrs2LTT2vywViRG2WzLwT 0CHTTnvETELLk6psIYSGHu2Pi81K9JoSz9ykieDZPlPZyLZmpWt8YIbPAdbMICEM7kZF mB5eKCadDx9jt6E9YG2mdumLJnYo6FJdk3M6rs7HXQKlCn2gYT87tF3rgVbP2QjH9UiH pdkCD4dSg/MEetjqyvFrRCYqEDKCZcp8cup74aiZyKyx40f4yOihDClc2yGdcoAQ34NK JFbg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOUpUlG951bf69gR+sSuI+xSIikw3OOgOoZr5yfQ3Baw8OTS/ELLmQFD sxuNxrjtiEe66E6TkrNQx5GOyo8d761cFIH4BkU= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AAOMgpdApRUCJW5dFuFEu5ow9bIgZ3nzipgLDCBK2OW8S28Frhjf+6vMc6nZ9c3K5u5M574kuhTf3hRJObzBz/Jxy6g= X-Received: by 2002:a0c:df14:: with SMTP id g20-v6mr375817qvl.183.1533230774809; Thu, 02 Aug 2018 10:26:14 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 2002:aed:2a83:0:0:0:0:0 with HTTP; Thu, 2 Aug 2018 10:26:14 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <153320759911.18959.8842396230157677671.stgit@localhost.localdomain> From: Yang Shi Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2018 10:26:14 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: Move check for SHRINKER_NUMA_AWARE to do_shrink_slab() To: Shakeel Butt Cc: Kirill Tkhai , Andrew Morton , Vladimir Davydov , Michal Hocko , Andrey Ryabinin , Huang Ying , Tetsuo Handa , Matthew Wilcox , jbacik@fb.com, Linux MM , LKML Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Aug 2, 2018 at 9:54 AM, Shakeel Butt wrote: > On Thu, Aug 2, 2018 at 9:47 AM Yang Shi wrote: >> >> On Thu, Aug 2, 2018 at 4:00 AM, Kirill Tkhai wrote: >> > In case of shrink_slab_memcg() we do not zero nid, when shrinker >> > is not numa-aware. This is not a real problem, since currently >> > all memcg-aware shrinkers are numa-aware too (we have two: >> >> Actually, this is not true. huge_zero_page_shrinker is NOT numa-aware. >> deferred_split_shrinker is numa-aware. >> > > But both huge_zero_page_shrinker and huge_zero_page_shrinker are not > memcg-aware shrinkers. I think Kirill is saying all memcg-aware > shrinkers are also numa-aware shrinkers. Aha, thanks for reminding. Yes, I missed that memcg-aware part. > > Shakeel