From: Brendan Jackman <jackmanb@google.com>
To: "Andrew Morton" <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
"Vlastimil Babka" <vbabka@kernel.org>,
"Suren Baghdasaryan" <surenb@google.com>,
"Michal Hocko" <mhocko@suse.com>,
"Brendan Jackman" <jackmanb@google.com>,
"Johannes Weiner" <hannes@cmpxchg.org>, "Zi Yan" <ziy@nvidia.com>,
"Sebastian Andrzej Siewior" <bigeasy@linutronix.de>,
"Clark Williams" <clrkwllms@kernel.org>,
"Steven Rostedt" <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
"Waiman Long" <longman@redhat.com>,
"Ridong Chen" <ridong.chen@linux.dev>,
"Tejun Heo" <tj@kernel.org>, "Michal Koutný" <mkoutny@suse.com>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
cgroups@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH v2 2/4] cgroup/cpuset: update some comments about the page allocator
Date: Tue, 14 Jul 2026 09:32:00 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260714-spin-trylock-followup-v2-2-3c20ed032b14@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260714-spin-trylock-followup-v2-0-3c20ed032b14@google.com>
These comments describing the page allocator are out of date:
- __alloc_pages() is no longer a public API and has no business being
described outside of mm/.
- The `wait` variable is gone.
It may be out of date for other reasons too but this patch is just
fixing the issues that stood out.
To fix it:
- Instead of referring to a specific function, instead to "the page
allocator"
- Completely drop out-of-date details of that function's internal
behaviour, since they were irrelevant anyway.
Suggested-by: Zi Yan <ziy@nvidia.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/DJP11T5V7BDW.2FZZZ8R6LOY4I@nvidia.com/
Signed-off-by: Brendan Jackman <jackmanb@google.com>
---
kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c | 13 +++++--------
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c b/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c
index 24ea2d09cdbdb..dfd0f827e3b92 100644
--- a/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c
+++ b/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c
@@ -4193,7 +4193,7 @@ static struct cpuset *nearest_hardwall_ancestor(struct cpuset *cs)
* nearest enclosing hardwalled ancestor cpuset.
*
* Scanning up parent cpusets requires callback_lock. The
- * __alloc_pages() routine only calls here with __GFP_HARDWALL bit
+ * page allocator only calls here with __GFP_HARDWALL bit
* _not_ set if it's a GFP_KERNEL allocation, and all nodes in the
* current tasks mems_allowed came up empty on the first pass over
* the zonelist. So only GFP_KERNEL allocations, if all nodes in the
@@ -4206,11 +4206,8 @@ static struct cpuset *nearest_hardwall_ancestor(struct cpuset *cs)
* come before the __GFP_HARDWALL check, otherwise a dying task
* would be blocked on the fast path.
*
- * The second pass through get_page_from_freelist() doesn't even call
- * here for GFP_ATOMIC calls. For those calls, the __alloc_pages()
- * variable 'wait' is not set, and the bit ALLOC_CPUSET is not set
- * in alloc_flags. That logic and the checks below have the combined
- * affect that:
+ * The second pass through get_page_from_freelist() doesn't even call here for
+ * GFP_ATOMIC calls. That, and the checks below have the combined affect that:
* in_interrupt - any node ok (current task context irrelevant)
* GFP_ATOMIC - any node ok
* tsk_is_oom_victim - any node ok
@@ -4327,8 +4324,8 @@ void cpuset_nodes_allowed(struct cgroup *cgroup, nodemask_t *mask)
* should not be possible for the following code to return an
* offline node. But if it did, that would be ok, as this routine
* is not returning the node where the allocation must be, only
- * the node where the search should start. The zonelist passed to
- * __alloc_pages() will include all nodes. If the slab allocator
+ * the node where the search should start. The zonelist used by
+ * the allocator will include all nodes. If the slab allocator
* is passed an offline node, it will fall back to the local node.
* See kmem_cache_alloc_node().
*/
--
2.54.0
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-07-14 9:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-07-14 9:31 [PATCH v2 0/4] mm/page_alloc: couple of followups for recent cleanups Brendan Jackman
2026-07-14 9:31 ` [PATCH v2 1/4] mm/page_alloc: rename FPI_TRYLOCK -> FPI_NOLOCK Brendan Jackman
2026-07-15 1:15 ` Zi Yan
2026-07-14 9:32 ` Brendan Jackman [this message]
2026-07-15 1:16 ` [PATCH v2 2/4] cgroup/cpuset: update some comments about the page allocator Zi Yan
2026-07-14 9:32 ` [PATCH v2 3/4] mm/page_alloc: fixup alloc_pages_nolock_noprof() comment Brendan Jackman
2026-07-15 1:19 ` Zi Yan
2026-07-15 9:01 ` Brendan Jackman
2026-07-14 9:32 ` [PATCH v2 4/4] mm/page_alloc: remove a VM_BUG_ON() Brendan Jackman
2026-07-15 1:19 ` Zi Yan
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=20260714-spin-trylock-followup-v2-2-3c20ed032b14@google.com \
--to=jackmanb@google.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
--cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=clrkwllms@kernel.org \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=longman@redhat.com \
--cc=mhocko@suse.com \
--cc=mkoutny@suse.com \
--cc=ridong.chen@linux.dev \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=surenb@google.com \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=vbabka@kernel.org \
--cc=ziy@nvidia.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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®