Re: [PATCH 2/2] mm/mempolicy: Skip walking HUGETLB vma if MPOL_MF_STRICT is specified alone

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 





On 1/14/20 5:07 PM, Mike Kravetz wrote:
On 1/14/20 6:09 AM, Li Xinhai wrote:
Add cc to
Yang Shi <yang.shi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Naoya Horiguchi <n-horiguchi@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
, who has been worked on this part

On 2020-01-14 at 17:16 Li Xinhai wrote:
Checking MPOL_MF_STRICT is ignored for HUGETLB vma according to mbind man
page:

Notes
MPOL_MF_STRICT is ignored on huge page mappings.

If MPOL_MF_STRICT is specified alone without any MOVE flag, we should
indicate, from test_walk, that walking this vma should be skipped even if
there are misplaced pages.

Signed-off-by: Li Xinhai <lixinhai.lxh@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@xxxxxxxx>
Cc: Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@xxxxxxxxxx>
I do not necessarily disagree with the change.  However, this has made me
question a couple things:
1) Why does the man page say MPOL_MF_STRICT is ignored on huge page mappings?
    - Is that leftover from the the days when huge page migration was not
      supported?
    - Is it just because huge page migration is more likely to fail than
      base page migration.
2) Does the mbind code function properly when unable to migrate a huge page
    MPOL_MF_STRICT is set?  A quick look at the code looks like it returns
    EIO.

I don't know the answer about question #1 I didn't dig into the history. The queue_pages_hugetlb() returns 0 unconditionally, I think this is what "MPOL_MF_STRICT is ignored on huge page mappings" means in code.

It would return -EIO for base pages or THP as what the manpage describes.


I will look into these questions.  However, if someone already knows the
answer that would be appreciated.





[Index of Archives]     [Linux ARM Kernel]     [Linux ARM]     [Linux Omap]     [Fedora ARM]     [IETF Annouce]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux OMAP]     [Linux MIPS]     [eCos]     [Asterisk Internet PBX]     [Linux API]

  Powered by Linux