On Mon 05-02-24 21:06:17, Baolin Wang wrote: [...] > > It is quite possible that traditional users (like large DBs) do not use > > CMA heavily so such a problem was not observed so far. That doesn't mean > > those problems do not really matter. > > CMA is just one case, as I mentioned before, other situations can also break > the per-node hugetlb pool now. Is there any other case than memory hotplug which is arguably different as it is a disruptive operation already. > Let's focus on the main point, why we should still keep inconsistency > behavior to handle free and in-use hugetlb for alloc_contig_range()? That's > really confused. yes, this should behave consistently. And the least surprising way to handle that from the user configuration POV is to not move outside of the original NUMA node. -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs
