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=-5.7 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_NONE 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 9C07DC47093 for ; Tue, 1 Jun 2021 08:48:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 409E161364 for ; Tue, 1 Jun 2021 08:48:11 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 409E161364 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=suse.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id D34E76B00A1; Tue, 1 Jun 2021 04:48:10 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id D0D8D6B00A2; Tue, 1 Jun 2021 04:48:10 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id BBF266B00A3; Tue, 1 Jun 2021 04:48:10 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from forelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0058.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.58]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8BA436B00A1 for ; Tue, 1 Jun 2021 04:48:10 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin14.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by forelay03.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 34C96824999B for ; Tue, 1 Jun 2021 08:48:10 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 78204527940.14.43C61A5 Received: from mx2.suse.de (mx2.suse.de [195.135.220.15]) by imf14.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1C542C00CBEF for ; Tue, 1 Jun 2021 08:47:57 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at test-mx.suse.de DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.com; s=susede1; t=1622537288; h=from:from:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc: mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=MMdwS/ef9ydlcUl/RcqGrwlMAgDRp0m5QB4l1k6zhDc=; b=m8ZTX+0EqSAI4Bk7cjO1Ow5K4pvDyxL2+JXo2S2cXntECd5PbJ9KYonmfeNxOnfzRcj7GM m6440iCYhq5z3t6VOIubYTIaArgZMFbonS/NoKabP1ef9U0vGa5Yl5kT8DgePUdF8j4KK7 bC2IZjsvJjIOhOirdW3/LzpyhHUntUs= Received: from relay2.suse.de (unknown [195.135.221.27]) by mx2.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id B291DAEB9; Tue, 1 Jun 2021 08:48:08 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 1 Jun 2021 10:48:08 +0200 From: Michal Hocko To: Feng Tang Cc: Andrew Morton , linux-mm@kvack.org, David Rientjes , Dave Hansen , Ben Widawsky , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Andrea Arcangeli , Mel Gorman , Mike Kravetz , Randy Dunlap , Vlastimil Babka , Andi Kleen , Dan Williams , ying.huang@intel.com Subject: Re: [v3 PATCH 0/3] mm/mempolicy: some fix and semantics cleanup Message-ID: References: <1622469956-82897-1-git-send-email-feng.tang@intel.com> <20210531144128.e69aaf2904e83ae170f00f06@linux-foundation.org> <20210601005513.GA15828@shbuild999.sh.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20210601005513.GA15828@shbuild999.sh.intel.com> Authentication-Results: imf14.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=suse.com header.s=susede1 header.b=m8ZTX+0E; spf=pass (imf14.hostedemail.com: domain of mhocko@suse.com designates 195.135.220.15 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=mhocko@suse.com; dmarc=pass (policy=quarantine) header.from=suse.com X-Rspamd-Server: rspam01 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 1C542C00CBEF X-Stat-Signature: q1efw31at1wjjd4x4ycsiok1phr5pkbd X-HE-Tag: 1622537277-912321 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 Tue 01-06-21 08:55:13, Feng Tang wrote: [...] > Current memory policy code has some confusing and ambiguous part about > MPOL_LOCAL policy, as it is handled as a faked MPOL_PREFERRED one, and > there are many places having to distinguish them. Also the nodemask > intersection check needs cleanup to be more explicit for OOM use, and > handle MPOL_INTERLEAVE correctly. This patchset cleans up these and > unifies the parameter sanity check for mbind() and set_mempolicy(). Looks good to me. I would just add that this cleanup helps to make further changes easier (notably MPOL_PREFERRED_MANY) -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs