From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-pf0-f200.google.com (mail-pf0-f200.google.com [209.85.192.200]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9577C6B0007 for ; Fri, 25 May 2018 15:43:03 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-pf0-f200.google.com with SMTP id s3-v6so3474745pfh.0 for ; Fri, 25 May 2018 12:43:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.linuxfoundation.org (mail.linuxfoundation.org. [140.211.169.12]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id s13-v6si23831933plp.350.2018.05.25.12.43.02 for (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 25 May 2018 12:43:02 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 12:43:00 -0700 From: Andrew Morton Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm, page_alloc: do not break __GFP_THISNODE by zonelist reset Message-Id: <20180525124300.964a1a15d953e8972625bb0f@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: <20180525130853.13915-1-vbabka@suse.cz> References: <20180525130853.13915-1-vbabka@suse.cz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Vlastimil Babka Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Mel Gorman , Michal Hocko , David Rientjes , Joonsoo Kim , stable@vger.kernel.org On Fri, 25 May 2018 15:08:53 +0200 Vlastimil Babka wrote: > we might consider this for 4.17 although I don't know if there's anything > currently broken. Stable backports should be more important, but will have to > be reviewed carefully, as the code went through many changes. > BTW I think that also the ac->preferred_zoneref reset is currently useless if > we don't also reset ac->nodemask from a mempolicy to NULL first (which we > probably should for the OOM victims etc?), but I would leave that for a > separate patch. Confused. If nothing is currently broken then why is a backport needed? Presumably because we expect breakage in the future? Can you expand on this?