From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-qk1-f182.google.com (mail-qk1-f182.google.com [209.85.222.182]) (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 6D18826ED3E for ; Thu, 13 Aug 2026 02:37:11 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.222.182 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1786588632; cv=none; b=KnM4CCaXGSfsSlZd98Q6TtennCvbwd05rTJ2xjz5AH9Z1kfdTFKOZxP65sXTxtcUyqwFrL9rexy9JH5a7WhTHmnfF3F9KNImbwJbp+0Vxo2C4PEGXn3vMemgNX8LYyl30K3Oy0kAuz+qBfJoIYCO4u3bzet9DkUcyAnnlQ2J3VY= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1786588632; c=relaxed/simple; bh=ZAxW5Wglg+eNEd/7E2VgSitqFFT3iAHesn5itEgojfI=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=sE+0Ttr/MPGMwJc63axv1lbjYIbkhG6Hr9giqlHC3N+1BZ026Fyuw5UHAH1XYRxB33/dNv3yoyKfKCYEsn5yid2uBbUvMFFghMfQpOO/6XslaDDryBeIirV7i4uXz+zePG0xXPzxC8gUjkCkIyicNJRT9iDlD74XXAOaXktGfWk= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=gourry.net; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gourry.net; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gourry.net header.i=@gourry.net header.b=Ut1lI8+T; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.222.182 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=gourry.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gourry.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gourry.net header.i=@gourry.net header.b="Ut1lI8+T" Received: by mail-qk1-f182.google.com with SMTP id af79cd13be357-92ed19f4d60so32249085a.0 for ; Wed, 12 Aug 2026 19:37:11 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gourry.net; s=google; t=1786588630; x=1787193430; darn=vger.kernel.org; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:content-type:mime-version :references:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date:from:to:cc:subject :date:message-id:reply-to:content-type; bh=iAIlYFnXn3LVoMPX9IDRNtgfCfuZ8em86m2CaDU8/H0=; b=Ut1lI8+Th91rtmqlpF5uu58FL6W24di/IVN4hD9Ua0yF90UzWtinb/QOnYj5x7ERuZ CydT8QftJMWWPo3BvKiPd/sI04dT+5AbtHtHzQiXmXraywowGZqXI1ySsACja90M5KVK YBuI6lXhaeqpJ1kXFGeYx4e1ImS/xYYcI3CoUrAuYaGQwdGB4brqud7deFDuDri2nDA6 pAslgTE/zedgBN0RxD6AXKBg1YLXj8jQ5P5eADvXIjoD6nMHIyiAPw2FVhnzi8FGHEBm NiAbmltf2WVtAvq+loz782NxPLv5eJ6okoVOIFm+ik7DZIZ2Cp47f9sMFL5KKdaw77kV L4tg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20251104; t=1786588630; x=1787193430; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:content-type:mime-version :references:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-gg :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to :content-type; bh=iAIlYFnXn3LVoMPX9IDRNtgfCfuZ8em86m2CaDU8/H0=; b=r0zWKitgy82ewWMGKOaDWRH+3Xrv/9nbYyR0We4iNrq+8o1MT5YGp314z6tTW4Rxex rIhmqjKAfEwZGu9aJ06fZraJFkeHU2WQthUfCPqTZGE6RNnkpltCI+OFOeqaRvNrOeWY 8w5Qhim58fckWhzzd3x7eDtd0KeKYzNf8HZProfFR8wAabiRMZfIQo/hUzEhdjJanaPY /A4OZWm0Q1zg96VIO+mpgrzpv4Miqwv9jzlguZ+tIAW9CZlHyvxD4gq11ketOWhlAz/8 k71HBVj3kY64agYw7Xq0WZ0BuYNNmEIedFLbvmm9eqWP2f1iI1yXk6V+r/EMXOGCjwhn ZUhA== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AHgh+RpniMCx6aYSS8LuOM4Jj02tNfXAq7glksa74Tdu2EFC2FqDEW+WFInj6cooSHtWkwKi0JwuUl8nX70lyxw=@vger.kernel.org X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YwkMeoJM3/75uoTSq1xfsaDTQwC9KKF4+pSA0GnnGKjvq5eMYty RLr9Tz2PW3CN6VaQdqaLgF85u1vb3HI3afKdQp1gTMIrJwWsv0xBiDctGCHtfoI7t40= X-Gm-Gg: AR+sD13DC8a15LGMAZaKjXXyXM1dUg/KkLfQLBi1KkDBCrwJOqhdYwxQw9E7hvjyrYy /Hehtg5p5emCi+9yx5Eqo0XTSi7LkkQWKGGiENRzhdaepkQYZhGzN/+qI/tKsK+A2N0srcE99TR iMJcr8IEy/clpdCmvKcoP1OysxH7CYwAa0z6CBP9cPKnYXoKV7yIITuHngG7gUJP1CqKKzG8DCM TsSN9bVNjnSu6mpG0kd1gfO2/TDHeryJfZPwbYoBdDOpn+HSiNlHeDWYkZagGSLaXG7am6negZM o2tgRS1MbNLdZcxfiKW1ajT1K8GUgK4mlGrnqUEx5sxHDyAWE4pb8sqX7DtIMJJLyATblYKL7Sz JWlO58luCY3v20iEtzTCAzYst1mi6TfuHR7xIsWLeMoatEBmvasqnrE5IqPbBNEpIvRS46bxdFO 9FH65mXPkbbhIw1DmtvRR29kxQKDh8U/Yt97y1TMGRp3jkEQ== X-Received: by 2002:a05:620a:2727:b0:92b:3203:ea70 with SMTP id af79cd13be357-936c0b68fa2mr178922485a.12.1786588630298; Wed, 12 Aug 2026 19:37:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fedora ([2601:19e:8500:d3c0::28fe]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id af79cd13be357-936c199108csm48835385a.19.2026.08.12.19.37.08 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 12 Aug 2026 19:37:09 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2026 22:37:06 -0400 From: Gregory Price To: Rakie Kim Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-cxl@vger.kernel.org, nvdimm@lists.linux.dev, ziy@nvidia.com, matthew.brost@intel.com, joshua.hahnjy@gmail.com, byungchul@sk.com, ying.huang@linux.alibaba.com, apopple@nvidia.com, david@kernel.org, ljs@kernel.org, liam@infradead.org, vbabka@kernel.org, rppt@kernel.org, surenb@google.com, mhocko@suse.com, dave@stgolabs.net, jic23@kernel.org, dave.jiang@intel.com, alison.schofield@intel.com, vishal.l.verma@intel.com, ira.weiny@intel.com, harry@kernel.org, kernel_team@skhynix.com, honggyu.kim@sk.com, yunjeong.mun@sk.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] mm/mempolicy: introduce package-aware weighted interleave Message-ID: References: <20260806080936.421-1-rakie.kim@sk.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: <20260806080936.421-1-rakie.kim@sk.com> On Thu, Aug 06, 2026 at 05:09:31PM +0900, Rakie Kim wrote: > Package-aware weighted interleave places a task's weighted-interleave > pages on the NUMA nodes of its local package, so that interleave traffic > does not have to cross the interconnect to another package. This keeps > each node's weight aligned with the bandwidth the task actually gets > from it, so effective bandwidth holds up on a system that has more than > one package. (A package is a CPU socket together with the memory > attached to it.) > The only major question I have before I dig into the actual patches is whether you actually need this on a *per-task* basis, rather than simply a *per-process* basis - because that's all this really buys you. You can already do what is described here by simply using a combination of cpuset and mempolicy cpuset.mems = 0,2 mempolicy = weighted interleave --all If this is actually required on a per-task basis, then I agree this concept is reasonable. I just want to make we're grounded on a real use case before we go adding this complexity. ~Gregory