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=-4.3 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_MUTT 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 AF062C04EB9 for ; Wed, 5 Dec 2018 20:15:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6B9A720645 for ; Wed, 5 Dec 2018 20:15:35 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1544040935; bh=NZnSMlwBg6i7YvR2M4DxLhwKgdBp3bAnZCeOYkeJncA=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:List-ID:From; b=RXKcTemQsngGa7m+RVW1tb7lThdjmJTtwWeF2PfgZcR3wG4oZHE5+v/2r9Gdov8sk ykZ4xRpkf4VXTP4abB1EuOfK78mNQIkMtwRh8uWsrUAppQ4uYRo6uFstwFtSieSAmS 6dFyPP87QS720KU9mY5mJ+L0o5ceXzP9ke5yHKR4= DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 6B9A720645 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=kernel.org 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 S1728501AbeLEUPe (ORCPT ); Wed, 5 Dec 2018 15:15:34 -0500 Received: from mx2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:52096 "EHLO mx1.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727257AbeLEUPe (ORCPT ); Wed, 5 Dec 2018 15:15:34 -0500 X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at test-mx.suse.de Received: from relay2.suse.de (unknown [195.135.220.254]) by mx1.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id C8923ACAB; Wed, 5 Dec 2018 20:15:31 +0000 (UTC) Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2018 21:15:28 +0100 From: Michal Hocko To: David Rientjes Cc: Linus Torvalds , Andrea Arcangeli , ying.huang@intel.com, s.priebe@profihost.ag, mgorman@techsingularity.net, Linux List Kernel Mailing , alex.williamson@redhat.com, lkp@01.org, kirill@shutemov.name, Andrew Morton , zi.yan@cs.rutgers.edu, Vlastimil Babka Subject: Re: [patch 1/2 for-4.20] mm, thp: restore node-local hugepage allocations Message-ID: <20181205201528.GW1286@dhcp22.suse.cz> References: <20181204073535.GV31738@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20181205073434.GT1286@dhcp22.suse.cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed 05-12-18 11:24:53, David Rientjes wrote: > On Wed, 5 Dec 2018, Michal Hocko wrote: > > > > > At minimum do not remove the cleanup part which consolidates the gfp > > > > hadnling to a single place. There is no real reason to have the > > > > __GFP_THISNODE ugliness outside of alloc_hugepage_direct_gfpmask. > > > > > > > > > > The __GFP_THISNODE usage is still confined to > > > alloc_hugepage_direct_gfpmask() for the thp fault path, we no longer set > > > it in alloc_pages_vma() as done before the cleanup. > > > > Why should be new_page any different? > > > > To match alloc_new_node_page() which does it correctly and does not change > the behavior of mbind() that the cleanup did, which used > alloc_hugepage_vma() to get the __GFP_THISNODE behavior. If there is a > reason mbind() is somehow different wrt allocating hugepages locally, I > think that should be a separate patch, but the goal of this patch is to > revert all the behavioral change that caused hugepages to be allocated > remotely. If the __GFP_THISNODE should be really used then it should be applied to all other types of pages. Not only THP. And as such done in a separate patch. Not a part of the revert. The cleanup was meant to unify THP allocations and that is why I object to reverting it as a part of this work. -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs