All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Miao Xie <miaox@cn.fujitsu.com>
To: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
Cc: Lee Schermerhorn <lee.schermerhorn@hp.com>,
	Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de>, Paul Menage <menage@google.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Linux-Kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Linux-MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] mm: fix bugs of mpol_rebind_nodemask()
Date: Fri, 23 Apr 2010 09:27:51 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4BD0F797.6020704@cn.fujitsu.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1004221415090.25350@chino.kir.corp.google.com>

on 2010-4-23 5:20, David Rientjes wrote:
> On Thu, 22 Apr 2010, Miao Xie wrote:
> 
>> - local variable might be an empty nodemask, so must be checked before setting
>>   pol->v.nodes to it.
>>
>> - nodes_remap() may cause the weight of pol->v.nodes being monotonic decreasing.
>>   and never become large even we pass a nodemask with large weight after
>>   ->v.nodes become little.
>>
> 
> That's always been the intention of rebinding a mempolicy nodemask: we 
> remap the current mempolicy nodes over the new nodemask given the set of 
> allowed nodes.  The nodes_remap() shouldn't be removed.

Suppose the current mempolicy nodes is 0-2, we can remap it from 0-2 to 2,
then we can remap it from 2 to 1, but we can't remap it from 2 to 0-2.

that is to say it can't be remaped to a large set of allowed nodes, and the task
just can use the small set of nodes for ever, even the large set of nodes is allowed,
I think it is unreasonable.

Thanks
Miao

> 
>> this patch fixes these two problem.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Miao Xie <miaox@cn.fujitsu.com>
>> ---
>>  mm/mempolicy.c |    9 ++++++---
>>  1 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/mm/mempolicy.c b/mm/mempolicy.c
>> index 08f40a2..03ba9fc 100644
>> --- a/mm/mempolicy.c
>> +++ b/mm/mempolicy.c
>> @@ -291,12 +291,15 @@ static void mpol_rebind_nodemask(struct mempolicy *pol,
>>  	else if (pol->flags & MPOL_F_RELATIVE_NODES)
>>  		mpol_relative_nodemask(&tmp, &pol->w.user_nodemask, nodes);
>>  	else {
>> -		nodes_remap(tmp, pol->v.nodes, pol->w.cpuset_mems_allowed,
>> -			    *nodes);
>> +		tmp = *nodes;
>>  		pol->w.cpuset_mems_allowed = *nodes;
>>  	}
>>  
>> -	pol->v.nodes = tmp;
>> +	if (nodes_empty(tmp))
>> +		pol->v.nodes = *nodes;
>> +	else
>> +		pol->v.nodes = tmp;
>> +
>>  	if (!node_isset(current->il_next, tmp)) {
>>  		current->il_next = next_node(current->il_next, tmp);
>>  		if (current->il_next >= MAX_NUMNODES)
> 
> 
> 



WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Miao Xie <miaox@cn.fujitsu.com>
To: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
Cc: Lee Schermerhorn <lee.schermerhorn@hp.com>,
	Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de>, Paul Menage <menage@google.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Linux-Kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Linux-MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] mm: fix bugs of mpol_rebind_nodemask()
Date: Fri, 23 Apr 2010 09:27:51 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4BD0F797.6020704@cn.fujitsu.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1004221415090.25350@chino.kir.corp.google.com>

on 2010-4-23 5:20, David Rientjes wrote:
> On Thu, 22 Apr 2010, Miao Xie wrote:
> 
>> - local variable might be an empty nodemask, so must be checked before setting
>>   pol->v.nodes to it.
>>
>> - nodes_remap() may cause the weight of pol->v.nodes being monotonic decreasing.
>>   and never become large even we pass a nodemask with large weight after
>>   ->v.nodes become little.
>>
> 
> That's always been the intention of rebinding a mempolicy nodemask: we 
> remap the current mempolicy nodes over the new nodemask given the set of 
> allowed nodes.  The nodes_remap() shouldn't be removed.

Suppose the current mempolicy nodes is 0-2, we can remap it from 0-2 to 2,
then we can remap it from 2 to 1, but we can't remap it from 2 to 0-2.

that is to say it can't be remaped to a large set of allowed nodes, and the task
just can use the small set of nodes for ever, even the large set of nodes is allowed,
I think it is unreasonable.

Thanks
Miao

> 
>> this patch fixes these two problem.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Miao Xie <miaox@cn.fujitsu.com>
>> ---
>>  mm/mempolicy.c |    9 ++++++---
>>  1 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/mm/mempolicy.c b/mm/mempolicy.c
>> index 08f40a2..03ba9fc 100644
>> --- a/mm/mempolicy.c
>> +++ b/mm/mempolicy.c
>> @@ -291,12 +291,15 @@ static void mpol_rebind_nodemask(struct mempolicy *pol,
>>  	else if (pol->flags & MPOL_F_RELATIVE_NODES)
>>  		mpol_relative_nodemask(&tmp, &pol->w.user_nodemask, nodes);
>>  	else {
>> -		nodes_remap(tmp, pol->v.nodes, pol->w.cpuset_mems_allowed,
>> -			    *nodes);
>> +		tmp = *nodes;
>>  		pol->w.cpuset_mems_allowed = *nodes;
>>  	}
>>  
>> -	pol->v.nodes = tmp;
>> +	if (nodes_empty(tmp))
>> +		pol->v.nodes = *nodes;
>> +	else
>> +		pol->v.nodes = tmp;
>> +
>>  	if (!node_isset(current->il_next, tmp)) {
>>  		current->il_next = next_node(current->il_next, tmp);
>>  		if (current->il_next >= MAX_NUMNODES)
> 
> 
> 


--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>

  reply	other threads:[~2010-04-23  1:26 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-04-22 14:11 [PATCH 1/2] mm: fix bugs of mpol_rebind_nodemask() Miao Xie
2010-04-22 14:11 ` Miao Xie
2010-04-22 21:20 ` David Rientjes
2010-04-22 21:20   ` David Rientjes
2010-04-23  1:27   ` Miao Xie [this message]
2010-04-23  1:27     ` Miao Xie
2010-04-23  8:45     ` David Rientjes
2010-04-23  8:45       ` David Rientjes
2010-04-29  4:03       ` Miao Xie
2010-04-29 18:03         ` David Rientjes
2010-04-29 18:03           ` David Rientjes
2010-05-04 10:53           ` Miao Xie
2010-05-04 10:53             ` Miao Xie

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=4BD0F797.6020704@cn.fujitsu.com \
    --to=miaox@cn.fujitsu.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=lee.schermerhorn@hp.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=menage@google.com \
    --cc=npiggin@suse.de \
    --cc=rientjes@google.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.