From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp-out1.suse.de (smtp-out1.suse.de [195.135.223.130]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BF0DF189F57 for ; Wed, 4 Dec 2024 09:00:42 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=195.135.223.130 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1733302844; cv=none; b=fbrfkVGsifbEMXnbjLS64RVG5Pgrom1U+pyFgrdy7NpWz+Go822R0ITjnSoJXEPVy93PXhHBMNVALeodVA2MAXnzh5TtKdwaKHcD3eCLOalTcLlpEZ47K75TH8rwYF68Xt++24nK1ZdICsSVo1e8QyH9O3xP6M6CuKvA8f/K3+s= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1733302844; c=relaxed/simple; bh=VFGn/i2mswdUo9vJGn70rNcLBz73roL+GQEm5meiYzU=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=sh4AlxgOsoKLE0wUfHdx/6c7pnwdvCuwfhjXq47MPVVt5itfcue0q9mIcDJIf+OdG6qny7W2WALoMiE1jdxwNpOlNfRuOPYyto6JCXaVLT18HcKBveOy2Ey8C5hqa1ZpnMlynjUhTCwjnBT+Qwi8NRiszKJcLs1MxvksTjCMSd4= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=suse.de; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=suse.de; arc=none smtp.client-ip=195.135.223.130 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=suse.de Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=suse.de Received: from imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org (imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org [IPv6:2a07:de40:b281:104:10:150:64:97]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by smtp-out1.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F095A21167; Wed, 4 Dec 2024 09:00:40 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp-out1.suse.de; none Received: from imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 51CEC139C2; Wed, 4 Dec 2024 09:00:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: from dovecot-director2.suse.de ([2a07:de40:b281:106:10:150:64:167]) by imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org with ESMTPSA id kxxfETgaUGcyZAAAD6G6ig (envelope-from ); Wed, 04 Dec 2024 09:00:40 +0000 Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2024 10:00:34 +0100 From: Oscar Salvador To: David Hildenbrand Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, Andrew Morton , Zi Yan , Michael Ellerman , Nicholas Piggin , Christophe Leroy , Naveen N Rao , Madhavan Srinivasan Subject: Re: [PATCH RESEND v2 4/6] mm/page_alloc: sort out the alloc_contig_range() gfp flags mess Message-ID: References: <20241203094732.200195-1-david@redhat.com> <20241203094732.200195-5-david@redhat.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20241203094732.200195-5-david@redhat.com> X-Rspamd-Pre-Result: action=no action; module=replies; Message is reply to one we originated X-Spam-Level: X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-4.00 / 50.00]; REPLY(-4.00)[]; ASN(0.00)[asn:25478, ipnet:::/0, country:RU] X-Spam-Score: -4.00 X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: F095A21167 X-Rspamd-Pre-Result: action=no action; module=replies; Message is reply to one we originated X-Rspamd-Action: no action X-Rspamd-Server: rspamd2.dmz-prg2.suse.org On Tue, Dec 03, 2024 at 10:47:30AM +0100, David Hildenbrand wrote: > It's all a bit complicated for alloc_contig_range(). For example, we don't > support many flags, so let's start bailing out on unsupported > ones -- ignoring the placement hints, as we are already given the range > to allocate. > > While we currently set cc.gfp_mask, in __alloc_contig_migrate_range() we > simply create yet another GFP mask whereby we ignore the reclaim flags > specify by the caller. That looks very inconsistent. > > Let's clean it up, constructing the gfp flags used for > compaction/migration exactly once. Update the documentation of the > gfp_mask parameter for alloc_contig_range() and alloc_contig_pages(). > > Acked-by: Zi Yan > Signed-off-by: David Hildenbrand Reviewed-by: Oscar Salvador -- Oscar Salvador SUSE Labs