linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
To: Junjie Fu <fujunjie1@qq.com>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	akpm@linux-foundation.org, dave.hansen@intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm/mempolicy: Fix decision-making issues for memory migration during NUMA balancing
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2024 12:33:52 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <Z0RgoOHMRFCTM1JB@tiehlicka> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <tencent_57D6CF437AF88E48DD5C5BD872753C43280A@qq.com>

On Sun 24-11-24 03:09:35, Junjie Fu wrote:
> When handling a page fault caused by NUMA balancing (do_numa_page), it is
> necessary to decide whether to migrate the current page to another node or
> keep it on its current node. For pages with the MPOL_PREFERRED memory
> policy, it is sufficient to check whether the first node set in the
> nodemask is the same as the node where the page is currently located. If
> this is the case, the page should remain in its current state. Otherwise,
> migration to another node should be attempted.
> 
> Because the definition of MPOL_PREFERRED is as follows: "This mode sets the
> preferred node for allocation. The kernel will try to allocate pages from
> this node first and fall back to nearby nodes if the preferred node is low
> on free memory. If the nodemask specifies more than one node ID, the first
> node in the mask will be selected as the preferred node."
> 
> Thus, if the node where the current page resides is not the first node in
> the nodemask, it is not the PREFERRED node, and memory migration can be
> attempted.
> 
> However, in the original code, the check only verifies whether the current
> node exists in the nodemask (which may or may not be the first node in the
> mask). This could lead to a scenario where, if the current node is not the
> first node in the nodemask, the code incorrectly decides not to attempt
> migration to other nodes.
> 
> This behavior is clearly incorrect. If the target node for migration and
> the page's current NUMA node are both within the nodemask but neither is
> the first node, they should be treated with the same priority, and
> migration attempts should proceed.

The code is clearly confusing but is there any actual problem to be
solved? IIRC although we do keep nodemask for MPOL_PREFERRED
policy we do not allow to set more than a single node to be set there.
Have a look at mpol_new_preferred

-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs


  parent reply	other threads:[~2024-11-25 11:33 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-11-23 19:09 Junjie Fu
2024-11-23 22:15 ` Matthew Wilcox
2024-11-25 11:33 ` Michal Hocko [this message]
2024-11-25 16:06   ` Gregory Price
2024-11-25 19:45   ` Junjie Fu
2024-11-25 20:18     ` Michal Hocko
2024-11-25 20:41       ` Junjie Fu

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=Z0RgoOHMRFCTM1JB@tiehlicka \
    --to=mhocko@suse.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=dave.hansen@intel.com \
    --cc=fujunjie1@qq.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    /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