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=-3.6 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_INVALID, DKIM_SIGNED,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS autolearn=no 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 0032CC433DB for ; Thu, 25 Mar 2021 14:11:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 715C5619E4 for ; Thu, 25 Mar 2021 14:11:31 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 715C5619E4 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=infradead.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 078E06B0073; Thu, 25 Mar 2021 10:11:31 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id ED4506B0074; Thu, 25 Mar 2021 10:11:30 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id D6D946B0075; Thu, 25 Mar 2021 10:11:30 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from forelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0104.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.104]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BD7C76B0073 for ; Thu, 25 Mar 2021 10:11:30 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin18.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by forelay04.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7B00BDDFD for ; Thu, 25 Mar 2021 14:11:30 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 77958584340.18.1E8C606 Received: from casper.infradead.org (casper.infradead.org [90.155.50.34]) by imf17.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2398D40002CA for ; Thu, 25 Mar 2021 14:11:19 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=infradead.org; s=casper.20170209; h=In-Reply-To:Content-Type:MIME-Version: References:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Sender:Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description; bh=JP8HgLro6AbZLt2MNRw3IANQzsJHTI7f+9qGAMl8N+o=; b=DqxCWL1Jwo4lXLuI8106Mtc5CH xO+DdWDRM0Td8F33WQ76z6ScIV5K9cYesdzhidA/U59KlheKVM9ru2K4rQw+FnZkihJjyMCJWDrOB qoTYDqRIOc8GtvXzO7LrF3nxl7VwtYxe9RD0c91IGwws8nuVnV495Fsx1nuJK1jtbgWJHMI5raAKA vcAi/HluSaIZCxyhhvx9VlaqFcsrhsys7PvvJTLqBH8C4wVDp7quMAkJsNG3heDRjBQ2L8GmrV48a O994D1ERIF8PdGJwzN2cAFG6T8e9DjIxlVUAu62LmDxaGMO+iWxXfEG1g89MlJUqZu5sAmczL519w rZzBKMtg==; Received: from willy by casper.infradead.org with local (Exim 4.94 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1lPQfv-00D2MO-Bh; Thu, 25 Mar 2021 14:09:33 +0000 Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2021 14:09:27 +0000 From: Matthew Wilcox To: Uladzislau Rezki Cc: Mel Gorman , Andrew Morton , Chuck Lever , Jesper Dangaard Brouer , Christoph Hellwig , Alexander Duyck , Vlastimil Babka , Ilias Apalodimas , LKML , Linux-Net , Linux-MM , Linux-NFS Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/9 v6] Introduce a bulk order-0 page allocator with two in-tree users Message-ID: <20210325140927.GX1719932@casper.infradead.org> References: <20210325114228.27719-1-mgorman@techsingularity.net> <20210325125001.GW1719932@casper.infradead.org> <20210325132556.GS3697@techsingularity.net> <20210325140657.GA1908@pc638.lan> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20210325140657.GA1908@pc638.lan> X-Stat-Signature: qi1xko5wega9q4s6u1r8mfo3pemijf7t X-Rspamd-Server: rspam05 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 2398D40002CA Received-SPF: none (infradead.org>: No applicable sender policy available) receiver=imf17; identity=mailfrom; envelope-from=""; helo=casper.infradead.org; client-ip=90.155.50.34 X-HE-DKIM-Result: pass/pass X-HE-Tag: 1616681479-29232 X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: On Thu, Mar 25, 2021 at 03:06:57PM +0100, Uladzislau Rezki wrote: > For the vmalloc we should be able to allocating on a specific NUMA node, > at least the current interface takes it into account. As far as i see > the current interface allocate on a current node: > > static inline unsigned long > alloc_pages_bulk_array(gfp_t gfp, unsigned long nr_pages, struct page **page_array) > { > return __alloc_pages_bulk(gfp, numa_mem_id(), NULL, nr_pages, NULL, page_array); > } > > Or am i missing something? You can call __alloc_pages_bulk() directly; there's no need to indirect through alloc_pages_bulk_array().