From: Bing Jiao <bingjiao@google.com>
To: "David Hildenbrand (Arm)" <david@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>,
Qi Zheng <zhengqi.arch@bytedance.com>,
Shakeel Butt <shakeel.butt@linux.dev>,
Lorenzo Stoakes <lorenzo.stoakes@oracle.com>,
Axel Rasmussen <axelrasmussen@google.com>,
Yuanchu Xie <yuanchu@google.com>, Wei Xu <weixugc@google.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm/vmscan: restore allowed mask in alloc_demote_folio()
Date: Mon, 2 Mar 2026 19:18:26 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <aaXigujRj2llz1xc@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <98480065-e988-477f-ba37-f9521e4aecbb@kernel.org>
On Mon, Mar 02, 2026 at 09:00:07AM +0100, David Hildenbrand (Arm) wrote:
> On 3/2/26 08:03, Bing Jiao wrote:
> > In alloc_demote_folio(), mtc->nmask is set to NULL for the first
> > allocation. If that succeeds, it returns without restoring mtc->nmask
> > to allowed_mask. For subsequent allocations from the migrate_pages()
> > batch, mtc->nmask will be NULL. If the target node then becomes full,
> > the fallback allocation will use nmask = NULL, allocating from any
> > node allowed by the task cpuset, which for kswapd is all nodes.
> >
> > To address this issue, restore the mtc->nmask to its original allowed
> > nodemask after the first allocation.
> >
>
> That would be
>
> Fixes: 320080272892 ("mm/demotion: demote pages according to allocation fallback order")
>
> ?
Thanks for pointing it out. Will add it in the new patch.
> > Signed-off-by: Bing Jiao <bingjiao@google.com>
> > ---
> > mm/vmscan.c | 2 +-
> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/mm/vmscan.c b/mm/vmscan.c
> > index cbffc0a27824..b42abd17aee7 100644
> > --- a/mm/vmscan.c
> > +++ b/mm/vmscan.c
> > @@ -985,11 +985,11 @@ static struct folio *alloc_demote_folio(struct folio *src,
> > mtc->nmask = NULL;
> > mtc->gfp_mask |= __GFP_THISNODE;
> > dst = alloc_migration_target(src, (unsigned long)mtc);
> > + mtc->nmask = allowed_mask;
> > if (dst)
> > return dst;
> >
> > mtc->gfp_mask &= ~__GFP_THISNODE;
> > - mtc->nmask = allowed_mask;
> >
> > return alloc_migration_target(src, (unsigned long)mtc);
> > }
> > --
> > 2.53.0.473.g4a7958ca14-goog
> >
>
> Maybe we should just not touch the original mtc?
>
> diff --git a/mm/vmscan.c b/mm/vmscan.c
> index de62225b381a..f07716e5389e 100644
> --- a/mm/vmscan.c
> +++ b/mm/vmscan.c
> @@ -985,9 +985,9 @@ static void folio_check_dirty_writeback(struct folio *folio,
> static struct folio *alloc_demote_folio(struct folio *src,
> unsigned long private)
> {
> + struct migration_target_control *mtc, target_nid_mtc;
> struct folio *dst;
> nodemask_t *allowed_mask;
> - struct migration_target_control *mtc;
>
> mtc = (struct migration_target_control *)private;
>
> @@ -1001,15 +1001,12 @@ static struct folio *alloc_demote_folio(struct folio *src,
> * a demotion of cold pages from the target memtier. This can result
> * in the kernel placing hot pages in slower(lower) memory tiers.
> */
> - mtc->nmask = NULL;
> - mtc->gfp_mask |= __GFP_THISNODE;
> - dst = alloc_migration_target(src, (unsigned long)mtc);
> + target_nid_mtc = *mtc;
> + target_nid_mtc.nmask = NULL;
> + target_nid_mtc.gfp_mask |= __GFP_THISNODE;
> + dst = alloc_migration_target(src, (unsigned long)&target_nid_mtc);
> if (dst)
> return dst;
> -
> - mtc->gfp_mask &= ~__GFP_THISNODE;
> - mtc->nmask = allowed_mask;
> -
> return alloc_migration_target(src, (unsigned long)mtc);
> }
>
>
>
> --
> Cheers,
>
> David
Thank you for the suggestion, David.
I agree that not touching the original mtc is a better. It makes
the distinction between the two allocation attempts much clearer
and avoids the side-effect bug. Will update it then.
Best,
Bing
prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-03-02 19:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-03-02 7:03 Bing Jiao
2026-03-02 8:00 ` David Hildenbrand (Arm)
2026-03-02 19:18 ` Bing Jiao [this message]
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=aaXigujRj2llz1xc@google.com \
--to=bingjiao@google.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=axelrasmussen@google.com \
--cc=david@kernel.org \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=lorenzo.stoakes@oracle.com \
--cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
--cc=shakeel.butt@linux.dev \
--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