From: Jinjiang Tu <tujinjiang@huawei.com>
To: <akpm@linuxfoundation.org>, <david@kernel.org>, <ziy@nvidia.com>,
<matthew.brost@intel.com>, <joshua.hahnjy@gmail.com>,
<rakie.kim@sk.com>, <byungchul@sk.com>, <gourry@gourry.net>,
<ying.huang@linux.alibaba.com>, <apopple@nvidia.com>,
<mgorman@suse.de>, <linux-mm@kvack.org>
Cc: <wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com>, <tujinjiang@huawei.com>
Subject: [PATCH v4] mm/mempolicy: fix mpol_rebind_nodemask() for MPOL_F_NUMA_BALANCING
Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2026 09:10:18 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260120011018.1256654-1-tujinjiang@huawei.com> (raw)
commit bda420b98505 ("numa balancing: migrate on fault among multiple
bound nodes") adds new flag MPOL_F_NUMA_BALANCING to enable NUMA balancing
for MPOL_BIND memory policy.
When the cpuset of tasks changes, the mempolicy of the task is rebound by
mpol_rebind_nodemask(). When MPOL_F_STATIC_NODES and MPOL_F_RELATIVE_NODES
are both not set, the behaviour of rebinding should be same whenever
MPOL_F_NUMA_BALANCING is set or not. So, when an application calls
set_mempolicy() with MPOL_F_NUMA_BALANCING set but both MPOL_F_STATIC_NODES
and MPOL_F_RELATIVE_NODES cleared, mempolicy.w.cpuset_mems_allowed should
be set to cpuset_current_mems_allowed nodemask. However, in current
implementation, mpol_store_user_nodemask() wrongly returns true, causing
mempolicy->w.user_nodemask to be incorrectly set to the user-specified
nodemask. Later, when the cpuset of the application changes,
mpol_rebind_nodemask() ends up rebinding based on the user-specified
nodemask rather than the cpuset_mems_allowed nodemask as intended.
I can reproduce with the following steps in qemu with 4 NUMA nodes:
1. echo '+cpuset' > /sys/fs/cgroup/cgroup.subtree_control
2. mkdir /sys/fs/cgroup/test
3. ./reproducer &
4. cat /proc/$pid/numa_maps, the task is bound to NUMA 1
5. echo $pid > /sys/fs/cgroup/test/cgroup.procs
6. cat /proc/$pid/numa_maps, the task is bound to NUMA 0 now.
The reproducer code:
int main()
{
struct bitmask *bmp;
int ret;
bmp = numa_parse_nodestring("1");
ret = set_mempolicy(MPOL_BIND | MPOL_F_NUMA_BALANCING,
bmp->maskp, bmp->size + 1);
if (ret < 0) {
perror("Failed to call set_mempolicy");
exit(-1);
}
while (1);
return 0;
}
If I call set_mempolicy() without MPOL_F_NUMA_BALANCING in the reproducer
code. After step 5, the task is still bound to NUMA 1.
To fix this, only set mempolicy->w.user_nodemask to the user-specified
nodemask if MPOL_F_STATIC_NODES or MPOL_F_RELATIVE_NODES is present.
Fixes: bda420b98505 ("numa balancing: migrate on fault among multiple bound nodes")
Reviewed-by: Gregory Price <gourry@gourry.net>
Reviewed-by: Huang Ying <ying.huang@linux.alibaba.com>
Acked-by: David Hildenbrand (Red Hat) <david@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Jinjiang Tu <tujinjiang@huawei.com>
---
Change in v4:
* add reproducer into changelog
* collect Acked-by from David
include/uapi/linux/mempolicy.h | 3 +++
mm/mempolicy.c | 2 +-
2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/mempolicy.h b/include/uapi/linux/mempolicy.h
index 8fbbe613611a..6c962d866e86 100644
--- a/include/uapi/linux/mempolicy.h
+++ b/include/uapi/linux/mempolicy.h
@@ -39,6 +39,9 @@ enum {
#define MPOL_MODE_FLAGS \
(MPOL_F_STATIC_NODES | MPOL_F_RELATIVE_NODES | MPOL_F_NUMA_BALANCING)
+/* Whether the nodemask is specified by users */
+#define MPOL_USER_NODEMASK_FLAGS (MPOL_F_STATIC_NODES | MPOL_F_RELATIVE_NODES)
+
/* Flags for get_mempolicy */
#define MPOL_F_NODE (1<<0) /* return next IL mode instead of node mask */
#define MPOL_F_ADDR (1<<1) /* look up vma using address */
diff --git a/mm/mempolicy.c b/mm/mempolicy.c
index 68a98ba57882..76da50425712 100644
--- a/mm/mempolicy.c
+++ b/mm/mempolicy.c
@@ -365,7 +365,7 @@ static const struct mempolicy_operations {
static inline int mpol_store_user_nodemask(const struct mempolicy *pol)
{
- return pol->flags & MPOL_MODE_FLAGS;
+ return pol->flags & MPOL_USER_NODEMASK_FLAGS;
}
static void mpol_relative_nodemask(nodemask_t *ret, const nodemask_t *orig,
--
2.43.0
reply other threads:[~2026-01-20 1:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: [no followups] expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed
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=20260120011018.1256654-1-tujinjiang@huawei.com \
--to=tujinjiang@huawei.com \
--cc=akpm@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=apopple@nvidia.com \
--cc=byungchul@sk.com \
--cc=david@kernel.org \
--cc=gourry@gourry.net \
--cc=joshua.hahnjy@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=matthew.brost@intel.com \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=rakie.kim@sk.com \
--cc=wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com \
--cc=ying.huang@linux.alibaba.com \
--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