From: Gregory Price <gourry@gourry.net>
To: Bing Jiao <bingjiao@google.com>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, "Waiman Long" <longman@redhat.com>,
"Johannes Weiner" <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
"Michal Hocko" <mhocko@kernel.org>,
"Roman Gushchin" <roman.gushchin@linux.dev>,
"Shakeel Butt" <shakeel.butt@linux.dev>,
"Muchun Song" <muchun.song@linux.dev>,
"Andrew Morton" <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
"David Hildenbrand" <david@kernel.org>,
"Lorenzo Stoakes" <lorenzo.stoakes@oracle.com>,
"Liam R. Howlett" <Liam.Howlett@oracle.com>,
"Vlastimil Babka" <vbabka@suse.cz>,
"Mike Rapoport" <rppt@kernel.org>,
"Suren Baghdasaryan" <surenb@google.com>,
"Tejun Heo" <tj@kernel.org>, "Michal Koutný" <mkoutny@suse.com>,
"Qi Zheng" <zhengqi.arch@bytedance.com>,
"Axel Rasmussen" <axelrasmussen@google.com>,
"Yuanchu Xie" <yuanchu@google.com>, "Wei Xu" <weixugc@google.com>,
cgroups@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm/vmscan: respect mems_effective in demote_folio_list()
Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2025 07:07:18 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <aUfi9gn5HS4u4ShU@gourry-fedora-PF4VCD3F> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20251220061022.2726028-1-bingjiao@google.com>
I think this patch can be done without as many changes as proposed here.
> -bool mem_cgroup_node_allowed(struct mem_cgroup *memcg, int nid);
> +void mem_cgroup_node_allowed(struct mem_cgroup *memcg, nodemask_t *nodes);
> -static inline bool mem_cgroup_node_allowed(struct mem_cgroup *memcg, int nid)
> +static inline void mem_cgroup_node_allowed(struct mem_cgroup *memcg,
> -int next_demotion_node(int node);
> +int next_demotion_node(int node, nodemask_t *mask);
> -bool cpuset_node_allowed(struct cgroup *cgroup, int nid)
> +void cpuset_node_allowed(struct cgroup *cgroup, nodemask_t *nodes)
These are some fairly major contract changes, and the names don't make
much sense as a result.
Would be better to just make something like
/* Filter the given nmask based on cpuset.mems.allowed */
mem_cgroup_filter_mems_allowed(memg, nmask);
(or some other, better name)
separate of the existing interfaces, and operate on one scratch-mask if
possible.
> +static int get_demotion_targets(nodemask_t *targets, struct pglist_data *pgdat,
> + struct mem_cgroup *memcg)
> +{
> + nodemask_t allowed_mask;
> + nodemask_t preferred_mask;
> + int preferred_node;
> +
> + if (!pgdat)
> + return NUMA_NO_NODE;
> +
> + preferred_node = next_demotion_node(pgdat->node_id, &preferred_mask);
> + if (preferred_node == NUMA_NO_NODE)
> + return NUMA_NO_NODE;
> +
> + node_get_allowed_targets(pgdat, &allowed_mask);
> + mem_cgroup_node_allowed(memcg, &allowed_mask);
> + if (nodes_empty(allowed_mask))
> + return NUMA_NO_NODE;
> +
> + if (targets)
> + nodes_copy(*targets, allowed_mask);
> +
> + do {
> + if (node_isset(preferred_node, allowed_mask))
> + return preferred_node;
> +
> + nodes_and(preferred_mask, preferred_mask, allowed_mask);
> + if (!nodes_empty(preferred_mask))
> + return node_random(&preferred_mask);
> +
> + /*
> + * Hop to the next tier of preferred nodes. Even if
> + * preferred_node is not set in allowed_mask, still can use it
> + * to query the nest-best demotion nodes.
> + */
> + preferred_node = next_demotion_node(preferred_node,
> + &preferred_mask);
> + } while (preferred_node != NUMA_NO_NODE);
> +
What you're implementing here is effectively a new feature - allowing
demotion to jump nodes rather than just target the next demotion node.
This is nice, but it should be a separate patch proposal (I think Andrew
said something as much already) - not as part of a fix.
> + /*
> + * Should not reach here, as a non-empty allowed_mask ensures
> + * there must have a target node for demotion.
Does it? What if preferred_node is online when calling
next_demotion_node(), but then is offline when
node_get_allowed_targets() is called?
> + * Otherwise, it suggests something wrong in node_demotion[]->preferred,
> + * where the same-tier nodes have different preferred targets.
> + * E.g., if node 0 identifies both nodes 2 and 3 as preferred targets,
> + * but nodes 2 and 3 themselves have different preferred nodes.
> + */
> + WARN_ON_ONCE(1);
> + return node_random(&allowed_mask);
Just returning a random allowed node seems like an objectively poor
result and we should just not demote if we reach this condition. It
likesly means hotplug was happening and node states changed.
> @@ -1041,10 +1090,10 @@ static unsigned int demote_folio_list(struct list_head *demote_folios,
> if (list_empty(demote_folios))
> return 0;
>
> + target_nid = get_demotion_targets(&allowed_mask, pgdat, memcg);
> if (target_nid == NUMA_NO_NODE)
> return 0;
> -
> - node_get_allowed_targets(pgdat, &allowed_mask);
in the immediate fixup patch, it seems more expedient to just add the
function i described above
/* Filter the given nmask based on cpuset.mems.allowed */
mem_cgroup_filter_mems_allowed(memg, nmask);
and then add that immediate after the node_get_allowed_targets() call.
Then come back around afterwards to add the tier/node-skip functionality
from above in a separate feature patch.
~Gregory
---
diff --git a/mm/vmscan.c b/mm/vmscan.c
index 670fe9fae5ba..1971a8d9475b 100644
--- a/mm/vmscan.c
+++ b/mm/vmscan.c
@@ -1046,6 +1046,11 @@ static unsigned int demote_folio_list(struct list_head *demote_folios,
node_get_allowed_targets(pgdat, &allowed_mask);
+ /* Filter based on mems_allowed, fail if the result is empty */
+ mem_cgroup_filter_nodemask(memcg, &allowed_mask);
+ if (nodes_empty(allowed_mask))
+ return 0;
+
/* Demotion ignores all cpuset and mempolicy settings */
migrate_pages(demote_folios, alloc_demote_folio, NULL,
(unsigned long)&mtc, MIGRATE_ASYNC, MR_DEMOTION,
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-12-21 12:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-12-20 6:10 Bing Jiao
2025-12-20 19:20 ` Andrew Morton
2025-12-22 6:16 ` Bing Jiao
2025-12-21 12:07 ` Gregory Price [this message]
2025-12-22 6:28 ` Bing Jiao
2025-12-21 23:36 ` [PATCH v2 0/2] fix demotion targets checks in reclaim/demotion Bing Jiao
2025-12-21 23:36 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] mm/vmscan: respect mems_effective in demote_folio_list() Bing Jiao
2025-12-22 2:38 ` Chen Ridong
2025-12-22 21:56 ` kernel test robot
2025-12-22 22:18 ` kernel test robot
2025-12-21 23:36 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] mm/vmscan: check all allowed targets in can_demote() Bing Jiao
2025-12-22 2:51 ` Chen Ridong
2025-12-22 6:09 ` Bing Jiao
2025-12-22 8:28 ` Chen Ridong
2025-12-23 21:19 ` [PATCH v3] mm/vmscan: fix demotion targets checks in reclaim/demotion Bing Jiao
2025-12-23 21:38 ` Bing Jiao
2025-12-24 1:19 ` Gregory Price
2025-12-26 18:48 ` Bing Jiao
2025-12-24 1:49 ` Chen Ridong
2025-12-26 18:58 ` Bing Jiao
2025-12-26 19:32 ` Waiman Long
2025-12-26 20:24 ` Waiman Long
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=aUfi9gn5HS4u4ShU@gourry-fedora-PF4VCD3F \
--to=gourry@gourry.net \
--cc=Liam.Howlett@oracle.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=axelrasmussen@google.com \
--cc=bingjiao@google.com \
--cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=david@kernel.org \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=longman@redhat.com \
--cc=lorenzo.stoakes@oracle.com \
--cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
--cc=mkoutny@suse.com \
--cc=muchun.song@linux.dev \
--cc=roman.gushchin@linux.dev \
--cc=rppt@kernel.org \
--cc=shakeel.butt@linux.dev \
--cc=surenb@google.com \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=vbabka@suse.cz \
--cc=weixugc@google.com \
--cc=yuanchu@google.com \
--cc=zhengqi.arch@bytedance.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