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 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 43946C433FE for ; Tue, 19 Oct 2021 15:54:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DD55D61154 for ; Tue, 19 Oct 2021 15:54:12 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 mail.kernel.org DD55D61154 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=reject dis=none) header.from=google.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 798456B009E; Tue, 19 Oct 2021 11:54:12 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 749146B00A0; Tue, 19 Oct 2021 11:54:12 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 6373E6B00A1; Tue, 19 Oct 2021 11:54:12 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from forelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0037.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.37]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 544666B009E for ; Tue, 19 Oct 2021 11:54:12 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin15.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by forelay02.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1E0D52FD89 for ; Tue, 19 Oct 2021 15:54:12 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 78713633544.15.041291C Received: from mail-lf1-f45.google.com (mail-lf1-f45.google.com [209.85.167.45]) by imf12.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BFE4A10000A9 for ; Tue, 19 Oct 2021 15:54:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-lf1-f45.google.com with SMTP id u21so8508009lff.8 for ; Tue, 19 Oct 2021 08:54:11 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20210112; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=SQ+A4NQkpvXDSEUSuSg9ZjNkNFu0PsTaZnbtgFfG3Q0=; b=A7Y67U9scji6kEWrogwR4V0Fjid80lnQNc1nyv8OO6sOAgMWUpGpqKF9/DNvA+7p+k bceomJ5SO5db0eZbkDCiLj/CfRE07YlzT2FT37zzBM9VhBlZMVcAb47xvx0Z7GYnb3Ox CMZpNXu+H4rba5Lymr4CRITFWHp9DArMOyhFXS7XvtWSOEV3wHbFoVB5jnvFfhlQnAMv N2Wat3/P3dDaficXJtS9q/zFFZD3IKpaFq8IsTLaeHrCneM6/JL/oBx9YqfZj+VB4ecH vbgHRlx9AvaEIXev7qn+ndXrh4H0ONb5LSurVqF7KCcKmWdnV72ZSWhvZG0jveo0pOf2 RpgQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=SQ+A4NQkpvXDSEUSuSg9ZjNkNFu0PsTaZnbtgFfG3Q0=; b=qpHD8UV80iOVL6L4p3v+ijp1m6QO47ESpr/UsEngPe92EC+vqzfax7KV6pHpwOq5Us SzUNn7vCKn3k6eHThYbBMEWbX5XZWruLIMgYtoZ4Bc1/D3LCiEJBQB2YTwsdR0MEwQqr Ta9/Beam4/FMe8z/vqlzsT1zCibaeC52GA9pH7kpyDf2qbWnkb/XAMwRi92QKiLSx0rp MUPY/uYFW14uwkVDeLckVmDcwhsXYDWNLTVfw+x96YpLWusuoYPJ76/AawlV9CTK/QNP txlgLnxTm5twKknIwm47bU0dEVXJxwoKUvFnVkf99qXmT/CxZsVtpPGM0a9+zWTOrW0r qm/A== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5328MLQdSvhaWo3oV7zVegoduYO5apSJRmI5jdwR1NvdTN2Dntdc hpCT8uVZJw3c6SFoKfjTbaTmQzV61lBXctTF9aqWFw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxGa+PAU2LW0zminwI8DAubYh8la4xjFe4g0Ha6k8+fDveL8bLcjfJ9VOKtHtG2wu2m3R7Kq+OMqGVtNepSjKc= X-Received: by 2002:ac2:5e3c:: with SMTP id o28mr6653219lfg.184.1634658849968; Tue, 19 Oct 2021 08:54:09 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20211018123710.1540996-1-chenwandun@huawei.com> <20211018123710.1540996-2-chenwandun@huawei.com> In-Reply-To: From: Shakeel Butt Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2021 08:53:58 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] mm/vmalloc: fix numa spreading for large hash tables To: Matthew Wilcox Cc: Chen Wandun , Andrew Morton , Nicholas Piggin , Linux MM , LKML , Eric Dumazet , Kefeng Wang , guohanjun@huawei.com, "Uladzislau Rezki (Sony)" Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: BFE4A10000A9 Authentication-Results: imf12.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=google.com header.s=20210112 header.b=A7Y67U9s; spf=pass (imf12.hostedemail.com: domain of shakeelb@google.com designates 209.85.167.45 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=shakeelb@google.com; dmarc=pass (policy=reject) header.from=google.com X-Stat-Signature: sfc94ha9do8a8d98ypw9sg1kejeobueu X-Rspamd-Server: rspam05 X-HE-Tag: 1634658851-7369 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 Mon, Oct 18, 2021 at 5:41 AM Matthew Wilcox wrote: > > On Mon, Oct 18, 2021 at 08:37:09PM +0800, Chen Wandun wrote: > > Eric Dumazet reported a strange numa spreading info in [1], and found > > commit 121e6f3258fe ("mm/vmalloc: hugepage vmalloc mappings") introduced > > this issue [2]. > > I think the root problem here is that we have two meanings for > NUMA_NO_NODE. I tend to read it as "The memory can be allocated from > any node", but here it's used to mean "The memory should be spread over > every node". Should we split those out as -1 and -2? I agree with Willy's suggestion to make it more explicit but as a followup work. This patch needs a backport, so keep this simple.