From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S1754826AbcKJJH1 (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Thu, 10 Nov 2016 04:07:27 -0500
Received: from outbound-smtp03.blacknight.com ([81.17.249.16]:47580 "EHLO
        outbound-smtp03.blacknight.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK)
        by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753306AbcKJJHZ (ORCPT
        <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Thu, 10 Nov 2016 04:07:25 -0500
Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2016 09:07:22 +0000
From: Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>
To: Xishi Qiu <qiuxishi@huawei.com>
Cc: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Tang Chen <tangchen@cn.fujitsu.com>, Linux MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "robert.liu@huawei.com" <robert.liu@huawei.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC] mem-hotplug: shall we skip unmovable node when doing numa
 balance?
Message-ID: <20161110090722.yyznotwqqxz3v6uo@techsingularity.net>
References: <582157E5.8000106@huawei.com>
 <20161109115827.GD3614@techsingularity.net>
 <5823E6AF.8040600@huawei.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <5823E6AF.8040600@huawei.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.6.2 (2016-07-01)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 11:17:03AM +0800, Xishi Qiu wrote:
> On 2016/11/9 19:58, Mel Gorman wrote:
> 
> > On Tue, Nov 08, 2016 at 12:43:17PM +0800, Xishi Qiu wrote:
> >> On mem-hotplug system, there is a problem, please see the following case.
> >>
> >> memtester xxG, the memory will be alloced on a movable node. And after numa
> >> balancing, the memory may be migrated to the other node, it may be a unmovable
> >> node. This will reduce the free memory of the unmovable node, and may be oom
> >> later.
> >>
> > 
> > How would it OOM later? It's movable memmory that is moving via
> > automatic NUMA balancing so at the very least it can be reclaimed. If
> > the memory is mlocked or unable to migrate then it's irrelevant if
> > automatic balancing put it there.
> > 
> 
> memtester will mlock the memory, so we can not reclaim, then maybe oom, right?
> So let the manager set some numa policies to prevent the above case, right?
> 

Deal with it using policies.

-- 
Mel Gorman
SUSE Labs