Hi,
the previous version of this patchset has been sent as an RFC [1].
As it doesn't seem anybody would object I am resending and asking
for merging.
Original reasoning:
While working on a hugetlb migration issue addressed in a separate
patchset [2] I have noticed that the hugetlb allocations from the
preallocated pool are quite subotimal. There is no fallback mechanism
implemented and no notion of preferred node. I have tried to work
around it by [4] but Vlastimil was right to push back for a more robust
solution. It seems that such a solution is to reuse zonelist approach
we use for the page alloctor.
This series has 3 patches. The first one tries to make hugetlb
allocation layers more clear. The second one implements the zonelist
hugetlb pool allocation and introduces a preferred node semantic which
is used by the migration callbacks. The last patch is a clean up.
This is based on top of the current mmotm tree (mmotm-2017-06-16-13-59).
Shortlog
Michal Hocko (3):
mm, hugetlb: unclutter hugetlb allocation layers
hugetlb: add support for preferred node to alloc_huge_page_nodemask
mm, hugetlb, soft_offline: use new_page_nodemask for soft offline migration
And the diffstat looks promissing as well
include/linux/hugetlb.h | 5 +-
include/linux/migrate.h | 2 +-
mm/hugetlb.c | 215 ++++++++++++++++--------------------------------
mm/memory-failure.c | 10 +--
4 files changed, 75 insertions(+), 157 deletions(-)
[1] http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20170613090039.14393-1-mhocko@xxxxxxxxxx
[2] http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20170608074553.22152-1-mhocko@xxxxxxxxxx
[3] http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20170608074553.22152-5-mhocko@xxxxxxxxxx
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>
