On Fri 31-01-20 18:49:24, Kirill Tkhai wrote: > On 31.01.2020 18:47, Michal Hocko wrote: > > On Fri 31-01-20 18:00:51, Kirill Tkhai wrote: > > [...] > >> @@ -333,8 +333,9 @@ static int memcg_expand_one_shrinker_map(struct mem_cgroup *memcg, > >> /* Not yet online memcg */ > >> if (!old) > >> return 0; > >> - > >> - new = kvmalloc(sizeof(*new) + size, GFP_KERNEL); > >> + /* See comment in alloc_mem_cgroup_per_node_info()*/ > >> + tmp = node_state(nid, N_NORMAL_MEMORY) ? nid : NUMA_NO_NODE; > >> + new = kvmalloc_node(sizeof(*new) + size, GFP_KERNEL, tmp); > >> if (!new) > >> return -ENOMEM; > > > > I do not think this is a good pattern to copy. Why cannot you simply use > > kvmalloc_node with the given node? The allocator should fallback to the > > closest node if the given one doesn't have any memory. > > Hm, why isn't the same scheme used in alloc_mem_cgroup_per_node_info() then? Dunno, it's an old code. Probably worth cleaning up. -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs
