From: Lin Ruifeng <linruifeng4@huawei.com>
To: <akpm@linux-foundation.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>,
<joro@8bytes.org>, <will@kernel.org>, <robin.murphy@arm.com>
Cc: <linux-mm@kvack.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: [RFC PATCH] mm/mempolicy: NUMA mempolicy mismatch during remote access
Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2026 20:04:24 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260316120424.1535575-1-linruifeng4@huawei.com> (raw)
I'd like to report an issue in the SVA I/O Page Fault (IOPF) handling path:
a NUMA memory policy mismatch caused by deferred workqueue processing.
When hardware triggers a page fault via the IOMMU SVA mechanism, it's handled
asynchronously by a kworker thread. Although the fault handler correctly uses
the original process's mm_struct for address space mapping, the physical page
allocation (e.g., in do_anonymous_page()) still depends on current->mempolicy.
Since current here is the kworker, not the original user process, any
task-level NUMA policy (e.g., set_mempolicy() or numactl --membind) is
completely ignored. Instead, allocation follows the kworker's default policy,
which may run on a different NUMA node.
A similar issue was also discussed in [1]. I was wondering if you might have
any suggestions on how to address this issue.
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/e2d5f3a5-f6f1-4567-a162-a0e814292738@asahilina.net/
Signed-off-by: Lin Ruifeng <linruifeng4@huawei.com>
2.43.0
next reply other threads:[~2026-03-16 12:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-03-16 12:04 Lin Ruifeng [this message]
2026-03-16 14:07 ` Gregory Price
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=20260316120424.1535575-1-linruifeng4@huawei.com \
--to=linruifeng4@huawei.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=apopple@nvidia.com \
--cc=byungchul@sk.com \
--cc=david@kernel.org \
--cc=gourry@gourry.net \
--cc=joro@8bytes.org \
--cc=joshua.hahnjy@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=matthew.brost@intel.com \
--cc=rakie.kim@sk.com \
--cc=robin.murphy@arm.com \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
--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