From: Gregory Price <gregory.price@memverge.com>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Gregory Price <gourry.memverge@gmail.com>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-api@vger.kernel.org,
linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
arnd@arndb.de, tglx@linutronix.de, luto@kernel.org,
mingo@redhat.com, bp@alien8.de, dave.hansen@linux.intel.com,
x86@kernel.org, hpa@zytor.com, tj@kernel.org,
ying.huang@intel.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 00/11] mm/mempolicy: Make task->mempolicy externally modifiable via syscall and procfs
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2023 11:14:44 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZWTAdKnBVO0+5bbR@memverge.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ZWS19JFHm_LFSsFd@tiehlicka>
On Mon, Nov 27, 2023 at 04:29:56PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> Sorry, didn't have much time to do a proper review. Couple of points
> here at least.
>
> >
> > So... yeah... the is one area I think the community very much needs to
> > comment: set/get_mempolicy2, many new mempolicy syscalls, procfs? All
> > of the above?
>
> I think we should actively avoid using proc interface. The most
> reasonable way would be to add get_mempolicy2 interface that would allow
> extensions and then create a pidfd counterpart to allow acting on a
> remote task. The latter would require some changes to make mempolicy
> code less current oriented.
Sounds good, I'll pull my get/set_mempolicy2 RFC on top of this.
Just context: patches 1-6 refactor mempolicy to allow remote task
twiddling (fixing the current-oriented issues), and patch 7 adds the pidfd
interfaces you describe above.
Couple Questions
1) Should we consider simply adding a pidfd arg to set/get_mempolicy2,
where if (pidfd == 0), then it operates on current, otherwise it
operates on the target task? That would mitigate the need for what
amounts to the exact same interface.
2) Should we combine all the existing operations into set_mempolicy2 and
add an operation arg.
set_mempolicy2(pidfd, arg_struct, len)
struct {
int pidfd; /* optional */
int operation; /* describe which op_args to use */
union {
struct {
} set_mempolicy;
struct {
} set_vma_home_node;
struct {
} mbind;
...
} op_args;
} args;
capturing:
sys_set_mempolicy
sys_set_mempolicy_home_node
sys_mbind
or should we just make a separate interface for mbind/home_node to
limit complexity of the single syscall?
Personally I like the dispatch for the extensibility nature of the arg
struct, but I can understand wanting to limit complexity of a syscall
interface for a variety of reasons.
~Gregory
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-11-27 16:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-11-22 21:11 Gregory Price
2023-11-22 21:11 ` [RFC PATCH 01/11] mm/mempolicy: refactor do_set_mempolicy for code re-use Gregory Price
2023-11-22 21:11 ` [RFC PATCH 04/11] mm/mempolicy: modify get_mempolicy call stack to take a task argument Gregory Price
2023-11-28 14:07 ` Michal Hocko
[not found] ` <ZWX1U1gCTXC+lFXn@memverge.com>
2023-11-28 14:49 ` Michal Hocko
2023-11-22 21:11 ` [RFC PATCH 07/11] mm/mempolicy: add task mempolicy syscall variants Gregory Price
2023-11-22 21:11 ` [RFC PATCH 08/11] mm/mempolicy: export replace_mempolicy for use by procfs Gregory Price
2023-11-22 21:11 ` [RFC PATCH 10/11] mm/mempolicy: mpol_parse_str should ignore trailing characters in nodelist Gregory Price
2023-11-22 21:12 ` [RFC PATCH 11/11] fs/proc: Add mempolicy attribute to allow read/write of task mempolicy Gregory Price
2023-11-22 21:33 ` [RFC PATCH 00/11] mm/mempolicy: Make task->mempolicy externally modifiable via syscall and procfs Andrew Morton
2023-11-22 21:35 ` Andrew Morton
2023-11-22 22:24 ` Gregory Price
2023-11-27 15:29 ` Michal Hocko
2023-11-27 16:14 ` Gregory Price [this message]
2023-11-28 9:45 ` Michal Hocko
2023-11-28 13:15 ` Gregory Price
[not found] ` <20231122211200.31620-3-gregory.price@memverge.com>
2023-11-28 14:07 ` [RFC PATCH 02/11] mm/mempolicy: swap cond reference counting logic in do_get_mempolicy Michal Hocko
[not found] ` <ZWX0ytAwmOdooHdZ@memverge.com>
2023-11-28 14:28 ` Michal Hocko
[not found] ` <20231122211200.31620-6-gregory.price@memverge.com>
2023-11-28 14:07 ` [RFC PATCH 05/11] mm/mempolicy: modify set_mempolicy_home_node to take a task argument Michal Hocko
2023-11-28 14:14 ` Gregory Price
[not found] ` <20231122211200.31620-7-gregory.price@memverge.com>
2023-11-28 14:11 ` [RFC PATCH 06/11] mm/mempolicy: modify do_mbind to operate on task argument instead of current Michal Hocko
2023-11-28 14:51 ` Gregory Price
2023-11-28 18:08 ` 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=ZWTAdKnBVO0+5bbR@memverge.com \
--to=gregory.price@memverge.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=gourry.memverge@gmail.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-api@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=luto@kernel.org \
--cc=mhocko@suse.com \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
--cc=ying.huang@intel.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