From: Ben Widawsky <ben.widawsky@intel.com>
To: linux-mm <linux-mm@kvack.org>, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Ben Widawsky <ben.widawsky@intel.com>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH 07/12] mm/mempolicy: handle MPOL_PREFERRED_MANY like BIND
Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2020 12:02:33 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20201030190238.306764-8-ben.widawsky@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20201030190238.306764-1-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.
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200630212517.308045-8-ben.widawsky@intel.com
Signed-off-by: Ben Widawsky <ben.widawsky@intel.com>
---
mm/mempolicy.c | 22 +++++++---------------
1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
diff --git a/mm/mempolicy.c b/mm/mempolicy.c
index f15dae340333..a991dabb636d 100644
--- a/mm/mempolicy.c
+++ b/mm/mempolicy.c
@@ -949,8 +949,6 @@ static void get_policy_nodemask(struct mempolicy *p, nodemask_t *nodes)
switch (p->mode) {
case MPOL_BIND:
case MPOL_INTERLEAVE:
- *nodes = p->nodes;
- break;
case MPOL_PREFERRED_MANY:
*nodes = p->nodes;
break;
@@ -1918,7 +1916,8 @@ static int apply_policy_zone(struct mempolicy *policy, enum zone_type zone)
nodemask_t *policy_nodemask(gfp_t gfp, struct mempolicy *policy)
{
/* Lower zones don't get a nodemask applied for MPOL_BIND */
- if (unlikely(policy->mode == MPOL_BIND) &&
+ if (unlikely(policy->mode == MPOL_BIND ||
+ policy->mode == MPOL_PREFERRED_MANY) &&
apply_policy_zone(policy, gfp_zone(gfp)) &&
cpuset_nodemask_valid_mems_allowed(&policy->nodes))
return &policy->nodes;
@@ -1974,7 +1973,6 @@ unsigned int mempolicy_slab_node(void)
return node;
switch (policy->mode) {
- case MPOL_PREFERRED_MANY:
case MPOL_PREFERRED:
/*
* handled MPOL_F_LOCAL above
@@ -1984,6 +1982,7 @@ unsigned int mempolicy_slab_node(void)
case MPOL_INTERLEAVE:
return interleave_nodes(policy);
+ case MPOL_PREFERRED_MANY:
case MPOL_BIND: {
struct zoneref *z;
@@ -2109,9 +2108,6 @@ bool init_nodemask_of_mempolicy(nodemask_t *mask)
task_lock(current);
mempolicy = current->mempolicy;
switch (mempolicy->mode) {
- case MPOL_PREFERRED_MANY:
- *mask = mempolicy->nodes;
- break;
case MPOL_PREFERRED:
if (mempolicy->flags & MPOL_F_LOCAL)
nid = numa_node_id();
@@ -2122,6 +2118,7 @@ bool init_nodemask_of_mempolicy(nodemask_t *mask)
case MPOL_BIND:
case MPOL_INTERLEAVE:
+ case MPOL_PREFERRED_MANY:
*mask = mempolicy->nodes;
break;
@@ -2165,12 +2162,11 @@ bool mempolicy_nodemask_intersects(struct task_struct *tsk,
* Thus, it's possible for tsk to have allocated memory from
* nodes in mask.
*/
- break;
- case MPOL_PREFERRED_MANY:
ret = nodes_intersects(mempolicy->nodes, *mask);
break;
case MPOL_BIND:
case MPOL_INTERLEAVE:
+ case MPOL_PREFERRED_MANY:
ret = nodes_intersects(mempolicy->nodes, *mask);
break;
default:
@@ -2394,7 +2390,6 @@ bool __mpol_equal(struct mempolicy *a, struct mempolicy *b)
switch (a->mode) {
case MPOL_BIND:
case MPOL_INTERLEAVE:
- return !!nodes_equal(a->nodes, b->nodes);
case MPOL_PREFERRED_MANY:
return !!nodes_equal(a->nodes, b->nodes);
case MPOL_PREFERRED:
@@ -2548,6 +2543,7 @@ int mpol_misplaced(struct page *page, struct vm_area_struct *vma, unsigned long
polnid = first_node(pol->nodes);
break;
+ case MPOL_PREFERRED_MANY:
case MPOL_BIND:
/*
@@ -2564,8 +2560,6 @@ int mpol_misplaced(struct page *page, struct vm_area_struct *vma, unsigned long
polnid = zone_to_nid(z->zone);
break;
- /* case MPOL_PREFERRED_MANY: */
-
default:
BUG();
}
@@ -3078,15 +3072,13 @@ void mpol_to_str(char *buffer, int maxlen, struct mempolicy *pol)
switch (mode) {
case MPOL_DEFAULT:
break;
- case MPOL_PREFERRED_MANY:
- WARN_ON(flags & MPOL_F_LOCAL);
- fallthrough;
case MPOL_PREFERRED:
if (flags & MPOL_F_LOCAL)
mode = MPOL_LOCAL;
else
nodes_or(nodes, nodes, pol->nodes);
break;
+ case MPOL_PREFERRED_MANY:
case MPOL_BIND:
case MPOL_INTERLEAVE:
nodes = pol->nodes;
--
2.29.2
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-10-30 19:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <20201030190238.306764-1-ben.widawsky@intel.com>
2020-10-30 19:02 ` [PATCH 01/12] mm/mempolicy: Add comment for missing LOCAL Ben Widawsky
2020-10-30 19:02 ` [PATCH 02/12] mm/mempolicy: convert single preferred_node to full nodemask Ben Widawsky
2020-10-30 19:02 ` [PATCH 03/12] mm/mempolicy: Add MPOL_PREFERRED_MANY for multiple preferred nodes Ben Widawsky
2020-10-30 19:02 ` [PATCH 04/12] mm/mempolicy: allow preferred code to take a nodemask Ben Widawsky
2021-01-03 13:34 ` [mm/mempolicy] 5ef9c2a53c: Kernel_panic-not_syncing:stack-protector:Kernel_stack_is_corrupted_in:mpol_new_preferred kernel test robot
2020-10-30 19:02 ` [PATCH 05/12] mm/mempolicy: refactor rebind code for PREFERRED_MANY Ben Widawsky
2020-10-30 19:02 ` [PATCH 06/12] mm/mempolicy: kill v.preferred_nodes Ben Widawsky
2020-10-30 19:02 ` Ben Widawsky [this message]
2020-10-30 19:02 ` [PATCH 08/12] mm/mempolicy: Create a page allocator for policy Ben Widawsky
2020-10-30 19:02 ` [PATCH 09/12] mm/mempolicy: Thread allocation for many preferred Ben Widawsky
2020-10-30 19:02 ` [PATCH 10/12] mm/mempolicy: VMA " Ben Widawsky
2020-10-30 19:02 ` [PATCH 11/12] mm/mempolicy: huge-page " Ben Widawsky
2020-10-30 19:02 ` [PATCH 12/12] mm/mempolicy: Advertise new MPOL_PREFERRED_MANY Ben Widawsky
2020-06-30 21:25 [PATCH v2 00/12] Introduced multi-preference mempolicy Ben Widawsky
2020-06-30 21:25 ` [PATCH 07/12] mm/mempolicy: handle MPOL_PREFERRED_MANY like BIND Ben Widawsky
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=20201030190238.306764-8-ben.widawsky@intel.com \
--to=ben.widawsky@intel.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=dave.hansen@intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
/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).