Re: [PATCH 0/4] mm/mempolicy: introduce package-aware weighted interleave

[Rakie Kim <rakie.kim@sk.com>]

On Sun, 16 Aug 2026 21:52:24 -0700 Joshua Hahn <joshua.hahnjy@gmail.com> wrote:

Hello Joshua,

Thanks for your feedback.

> On Sun, 16 Aug 2026 20:46:16 -0400 Gregory Price <gourry@gourry.net> wrote:
>
> > I think you are over-complicating the explanation and that's making it
> > hard for folks to reason about this.
> >
> > My best understanding here is for multi-socket systems, weighted
> > interleave as-designed is inherently sub-optimal for scaled workloads
> > that utilize multi-socket ("package") memory resources (DRAM, CXL...)
>
> I was thinking about this and I think Gregory is right here.

I agree. From now on I will keep my explanations focused on the key
points.

> I wonder how much of the framing around this series can be preserved /
> simplified if we just say "prevent tasks from allocating memory
> cross-socket".

I think this is a good suggestion. Even if it is not this exact
wording, I will look for a shorter and better description that
includes your idea.

> I also wonder if instead of limiting this to weighted interleave,
> this can sit on top of other mpols and just nodemasks against
> cross-socket nodes.

It does not have to apply only to weighted interleave. Patch 2 simply
groups NUMA nodes by the package they belong to. So the same grouping
can also be used for interleave, not just weighted interleave. I have
not applied it to interleave because I could not find a clear use
case for it yet.

> I am also out on vacation this week : -)
> I'll take a closer look along with the code next week as well.

Thank you. I look forward to your comments.

Thanks again for your time and review.

Rakie Kim