Re: [PATCH] Revert "mm, hugetlb: remove hugepages_treat_as_movable sysctl"

[Gregory Price <gourry@gourry.net>]

On Wed, Oct 08, 2025 at 09:08:01AM -0700, Frank van der Linden wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 8, 2025 at 7:59 AM Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com> wrote:
> >
> > Maybe what we really want is to have a configurable zone rather than a
> > very specific consumer of it instead. What do I mean by that? We clearly
> > have physically (DMA, DMA32) and usability (NORMAL, MOVABLE) constrained
> > zones. So rather than having a MOVABLE zone we can have a single zone
> > $FOO_NAME zone with configurable attributes - like allocation
> > constrains (kernel, user, movable, etc).
...
> 
> I agree that having mutiple zone properties is probably the way to go.
> 

This I imagine would need to be a build-time configuration, as you'd run
into issues flipping these bits if the memory is already in use.

This of course begs the question - if one configurable zone, why not N
configuable zones?

~Gregory