On 11/28/2017 10:57 PM, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Tue 28-11-17 13:34:53, Mike Kravetz wrote:
>> On 11/28/2017 06:12 AM, Michal Hocko wrote:
> [...]
>>> +/*
>>> + * Allocates a fresh page to the hugetlb allocator pool in the node interleaved
>>> + * manner.
>>> + */
>>> static int alloc_fresh_huge_page(struct hstate *h, nodemask_t *nodes_allowed)
>>> {
>>> struct page *page;
>>> int nr_nodes, node;
>>> - int ret = 0;
>>> + gfp_t gfp_mask = htlb_alloc_mask(h) | __GFP_THISNODE;
>>>
>>> for_each_node_mask_to_alloc(h, nr_nodes, node, nodes_allowed) {
>>> - page = alloc_fresh_huge_page_node(h, node);
>>> - if (page) {
>>> - ret = 1;
>>> + page = __hugetlb_alloc_buddy_huge_page(h, gfp_mask,
>>> + node, nodes_allowed);
>>
>> I don't have the greatest understanding of node/nodemasks, but ...
>> Since __hugetlb_alloc_buddy_huge_page calls __alloc_pages_nodemask(), do
>> we still need to explicitly iterate over nodes with
>> for_each_node_mask_to_alloc() here?
>
> Yes we do, because callers depend on the round robin allocation policy
> which is implemented by the ugly for_each_node_mask_to_alloc. I am not
> saying I like the way this is done but this is user visible thing.
Ah, thanks.
I missed the __GFP_THISNODE. Because of that, the nodes_allowed mask is
not used in the allocation attempts. So, cycling through the nodes with
the for_each_node_mask_to_alloc makes sense.
> Or maybe I've missunderstood the whole thing...
No, this should preserve the original behavior.
--
Mike Kravetz
--
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>
