From: Chen Ridong <chenridong@huaweicloud.com>
To: Bing Jiao <bingjiao@google.com>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
stable@vger.kernel.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
gourry@gourry.net, longman@redhat.com, hannes@cmpxchg.org,
mhocko@kernel.org, roman.gushchin@linux.dev,
shakeel.butt@linux.dev, muchun.song@linux.dev, tj@kernel.org,
mkoutny@suse.com, david@kernel.org, zhengqi.arch@bytedance.com,
lorenzo.stoakes@oracle.com, axelrasmussen@google.com,
yuanchu@google.com, weixugc@google.com, cgroups@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] mm/vmscan: check all allowed targets in can_demote()
Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2025 16:28:51 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <2906e2b7-cc89-4d1b-893a-c20e4f100f97@huaweicloud.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <aUjgt4EdBv4UyrTM@google.com>
On 2025/12/22 14:09, Bing Jiao wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 22, 2025 at 10:51:49AM +0800, Chen Ridong wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 2025/12/22 7:36, Bing Jiao wrote:
>>> -void cpuset_node_filter_allowed(struct cgroup *cgroup, nodemask_t *mask)
>>> -{
>>> - struct cgroup_subsys_state *css;
>>> - struct cpuset *cs;
>>> -
>>> - if (!cpuset_v2())
>>> - return;
>>> -
>>> - css = cgroup_get_e_css(cgroup, &cpuset_cgrp_subsys);
>>> - if (!css)
>>> - return;
>>> -
>>> - /* Follows the same assumption in cpuset_node_allowed() */
>>> - cs = container_of(css, struct cpuset, css);
>>> nodes_and(*mask, *mask, cs->effective_mems);
>>> css_put(css);
>>> }
>>
>> Oh, I see you merged these two functions here.
>>
>> However, I think cpuset_get_mem_allowed would be more versatile in general use.
>>
>> You can then check whether the returned nodemask intersects with your target mask. In the future,
>> there may be scenarios where users simply want to retrieve the effective masks directly.
>>
>
> Hi Ridong, thank you for the suggestions.
>
> I agree that returning a nodemask would provide greater versatility.
>
> I think cpuset_get_mem_allowed_relax() would be a better name,
> since we do not need the locking and online mem guarantees
> compared to an similar function cpuset_mems_allowed().
>
I think the key difference between cpuset_mems_allowed and the helper you intend to implement lies
not in locking or online memory guarantees, but in the input parameter: you want to retrieve
cpuset->effective_mems for a cgroup from another subsystem.
The cs->effective_mems should typically only include online nodes, except during brief transitional
periods such as hotplug operations. Similarly, node migration logic also requires online nodes.
Therefore, cpuset_get_mem_allowed seems acceptable to me.
Additionally, you may consider calling guarantee_online_mems inside your new helper to ensure
consistency.
--
Best regards,
Ridong
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-12-22 8:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-12-20 6:10 [PATCH] mm/vmscan: respect mems_effective in demote_folio_list() Bing Jiao
2025-12-20 19:20 ` Andrew Morton
2025-12-22 6:16 ` Bing Jiao
2025-12-21 12:07 ` Gregory Price
2025-12-22 6:28 ` Bing Jiao
2025-12-21 23:36 ` [PATCH v2 0/2] fix demotion targets checks in reclaim/demotion Bing Jiao
2025-12-21 23:36 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] mm/vmscan: respect mems_effective in demote_folio_list() Bing Jiao
2025-12-22 2:38 ` Chen Ridong
2025-12-22 21:56 ` kernel test robot
2025-12-22 22:18 ` kernel test robot
2025-12-21 23:36 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] mm/vmscan: check all allowed targets in can_demote() Bing Jiao
2025-12-22 2:51 ` Chen Ridong
2025-12-22 6:09 ` Bing Jiao
2025-12-22 8:28 ` Chen Ridong [this message]
2025-12-23 21:19 ` [PATCH v3] mm/vmscan: fix demotion targets checks in reclaim/demotion Bing Jiao
2025-12-23 21:38 ` Bing Jiao
2025-12-24 1:19 ` Gregory Price
2025-12-26 18:48 ` Bing Jiao
2025-12-24 1:49 ` Chen Ridong
2025-12-26 18:58 ` Bing Jiao
2025-12-26 19:32 ` Waiman Long
2025-12-26 20:24 ` Waiman Long
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=2906e2b7-cc89-4d1b-893a-c20e4f100f97@huaweicloud.com \
--to=chenridong@huaweicloud.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=axelrasmussen@google.com \
--cc=bingjiao@google.com \
--cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=david@kernel.org \
--cc=gourry@gourry.net \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=longman@redhat.com \
--cc=lorenzo.stoakes@oracle.com \
--cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
--cc=mkoutny@suse.com \
--cc=muchun.song@linux.dev \
--cc=roman.gushchin@linux.dev \
--cc=shakeel.butt@linux.dev \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=weixugc@google.com \
--cc=yuanchu@google.com \
--cc=zhengqi.arch@bytedance.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