From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wr0-f199.google.com (mail-wr0-f199.google.com [209.85.128.199]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B54D2831F4 for ; Thu, 18 May 2017 06:25:38 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-wr0-f199.google.com with SMTP id g67so8318029wrd.0 for ; Thu, 18 May 2017 03:25:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx1.suse.de (mx2.suse.de. [195.135.220.15]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id b143si6115176wme.100.2017.05.18.03.25.36 for (version=TLS1 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Thu, 18 May 2017 03:25:36 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/6] mm, page_alloc: pass preferred nid instead of zonelist to allocator References: <20170517081140.30654-1-vbabka@suse.cz> <20170517081140.30654-4-vbabka@suse.cz> From: Vlastimil Babka Message-ID: Date: Thu, 18 May 2017 12:25:03 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Christoph Lameter Cc: Andrew Morton , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-api@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, cgroups@vger.kernel.org, Li Zefan , Michal Hocko , Mel Gorman , David Rientjes , Hugh Dickins , Andrea Arcangeli , Anshuman Khandual , "Kirill A. Shutemov" , Dimitri Sivanich On 05/17/2017 05:19 PM, Christoph Lameter wrote: > On Wed, 17 May 2017, Vlastimil Babka wrote: > >> struct page * >> -__alloc_pages_nodemask(gfp_t gfp_mask, unsigned int order, >> - struct zonelist *zonelist, nodemask_t *nodemask); >> +__alloc_pages_nodemask(gfp_t gfp_mask, unsigned int order, int preferred_nid, >> + nodemask_t *nodemask); >> >> static inline struct page * >> -__alloc_pages(gfp_t gfp_mask, unsigned int order, >> - struct zonelist *zonelist) >> +__alloc_pages(gfp_t gfp_mask, unsigned int order, int preferred_nid) >> { >> - return __alloc_pages_nodemask(gfp_mask, order, zonelist, NULL); >> + return __alloc_pages_nodemask(gfp_mask, order, preferred_nid, NULL); >> } > > Maybe use nid instead of preferred_nid like in __alloc_pages? Otherwise > there may be confusion with the MPOL_PREFER policy. I'll think about that. >> @@ -1963,8 +1960,8 @@ alloc_pages_vma(gfp_t gfp, int order, struct vm_area_struct *vma, >> { >> struct mempolicy *pol; >> struct page *page; >> + int preferred_nid; >> unsigned int cpuset_mems_cookie; >> - struct zonelist *zl; >> nodemask_t *nmask; > > Same here. > >> @@ -4012,8 +4012,8 @@ static inline void finalise_ac(gfp_t gfp_mask, >> * This is the 'heart' of the zoned buddy allocator. >> */ >> struct page * >> -__alloc_pages_nodemask(gfp_t gfp_mask, unsigned int order, >> - struct zonelist *zonelist, nodemask_t *nodemask) >> +__alloc_pages_nodemask(gfp_t gfp_mask, unsigned int order, int preferred_nid, >> + nodemask_t *nodemask) >> { > > and here > > This looks clean to me. Still feel a bit uneasy about this since I do > remember that we had a reason to use zonelists instead of nodes back then > but cannot remember what that reason was.... My history digging showed me that mempolicies used to have a custom zonelist attached, not nodemask. So I supposed that's why. > CCing Dimitri at SGI. This may break a lot of legacy SGIapps. If you read > this Dimitri then please review this patchset and the discussions around > it. Break how? This shouldn't break any apps AFAICS, just out-of-tree kernel patches/modules as usual when APIs change. > Reviewed-by: Christoph Lameter Thanks! -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org