From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
To: Yang Shi <yang.shi@linux.alibaba.com>
Cc: Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
"linux-mm@kvack.org" <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [HELP] How to get task_struct from mm
Date: Thu, 30 May 2019 17:41:19 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190530154119.GF6703@dhcp22.suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5cf71366-ba01-8ef0-3dbd-c9fec8a2b26f@linux.alibaba.com>
On Thu 30-05-19 14:57:46, Yang Shi wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
>
> As what we discussed about page demotion for PMEM at LSF/MM, the demotion
> should respect to the mempolicy and allowed mems of the process which the
> page (anonymous page only for now) belongs to.
cpusets memory mask (aka mems_allowed) is indeed tricky and somehow
awkward. It is inherently an address space property and I never
understood why we have it per _thread_. This just doesn't make any
sense to me. This just leads to weird corner cases. What should happen
if different threads disagree about the allocation affinity while
working on a shared address space?
> The vma that the page is mapped to can be retrieved from rmap walk easily,
> but we need know the task_struct that the vma belongs to. It looks there is
> not such API, and container_of seems not work with pointer member.
I do not think this is a good idea. As you point out in the reply we
have that for memcgs but we really hope to get rid of mm->owner there
as well. It is just more tricky there. Moreover such a reverse mapping
would be incorrect. Just think of a disagreeing yet overlapping cpusets
for different threads mapping the same page.
Is it such a big deal to document that the node migrate is not
compatible with cpusets?
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-05-30 15:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-05-30 6:57 Yang Shi
2019-05-30 7:26 ` Yang Shi
2019-05-30 15:41 ` Michal Hocko [this message]
2019-05-31 12:51 ` Yang Shi
2019-05-31 13:56 ` Michal Hocko
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=20190530154119.GF6703@dhcp22.suse.cz \
--to=mhocko@kernel.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mgorman@techsingularity.net \
--cc=yang.shi@linux.alibaba.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