linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
To: Muchun Song <songmuchun@bytedance.com>
Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, bwidawsk@kernel.org,
	dave.hansen@linux.intel.com, feng.tang@intel.com,
	linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: mempolicy: fix policy_nodemask() for MPOL_PREFERRED_MANY case
Date: Mon, 1 Aug 2022 11:06:14 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <YueXhmiFcI8iw3OI@dhcp22.suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220801084207.39086-1-songmuchun@bytedance.com>

On Mon 01-08-22 16:42:07, Muchun Song wrote:
> policy_nodemask() is supposed to be returned a nodemask representing a mempolicy
> for filtering nodes for page allocation, which is a hard restriction (see the user
> of allowed_mems_nr() in hugetlb.c).  However, MPOL_PREFERRED_MANY is a preferred
> mode not a hard restriction.  Now it breaks the user of HugeTLB.  Remove it from
> policy_nodemask() to fix it, which will not affect current users of policy_nodemask()
> since all of the users already have handled the case of MPOL_PREFERRED_MANY before
> calling it.  BTW, it is found by code inspection.

I am not sure this is the right fix. It is quite true that
policy_nodemask is a tricky function to use. It pretends to have a
higher level logic but all existing users are expected to be policy
aware and they special case allocation for each policy. That would mean
that hugetlb should do the same.

I haven't checked the actual behavior implications for hugetlb here. Is
MPOL_PREFERRED_MANY even supported for hugetlb? Does this change make it
work? From a quick look this just ignores MPOL_PREFERRED_MANY
completely.
 
> Fixes: b27abaccf8e8 ("mm/mempolicy: add MPOL_PREFERRED_MANY for multiple preferred nodes")
> Signed-off-by: Muchun Song <songmuchun@bytedance.com>
> ---
>  mm/mempolicy.c | 3 ---
>  1 file changed, 3 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/mm/mempolicy.c b/mm/mempolicy.c
> index 6c27acb6cd63..4deec7e598c6 100644
> --- a/mm/mempolicy.c
> +++ b/mm/mempolicy.c
> @@ -1845,9 +1845,6 @@ nodemask_t *policy_nodemask(gfp_t gfp, struct mempolicy *policy)
>  		cpuset_nodemask_valid_mems_allowed(&policy->nodes))
>  		return &policy->nodes;
>  
> -	if (mode == MPOL_PREFERRED_MANY)
> -		return &policy->nodes;
> -
>  	return NULL;
>  }
>  
> -- 
> 2.11.0

-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs

  reply	other threads:[~2022-08-01  9:06 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-08-01  8:42 [PATCH] mm: mempolicy: fix policy_nodemask() for MPOL_PREFERRED_MANY case Muchun Song
2022-08-01  9:06 ` Michal Hocko [this message]
2022-08-01  9:26   ` Feng Tang
2022-08-02  3:42     ` Muchun Song
2022-08-02  5:52       ` Feng Tang
2022-08-02  6:40         ` Muchun Song
2022-08-02  7:39           ` Feng Tang
2022-08-02  9:02             ` Michal Hocko
2022-08-03  6:41               ` Feng Tang
2022-08-03  7:36                 ` Michal Hocko
2022-08-03 17:14                   ` Feng Tang
2022-08-03 11:28                     ` Michal Hocko
2022-08-03 20:43                       ` Feng Tang
2022-08-03 12:56                         ` Michal Hocko
2022-08-03 21:08                           ` Feng Tang
2022-08-03 13:21                             ` Michal Hocko
2022-08-04  8:27                               ` Feng Tang
2022-08-04 10:43                                 ` Michal Hocko
2022-08-04 13:03                                   ` [PATCH] mm/hugetlb: add dedicated func to get 'allowed' nodemask for current process Feng Tang
2022-08-04 13:36                                     ` Michal Hocko
2022-08-04 22:37                                       ` Andrew Morton
2022-08-05  0:06                                         ` Feng Tang

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=YueXhmiFcI8iw3OI@dhcp22.suse.cz \
    --to=mhocko@suse.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=bwidawsk@kernel.org \
    --cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=feng.tang@intel.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=songmuchun@bytedance.com \
    /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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).