From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-qk1-f173.google.com (mail-qk1-f173.google.com [209.85.222.173]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 07D124963D5 for ; Mon, 20 Jul 2026 19:35:39 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.222.173 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1784576143; cv=none; b=ZfQNAMqCXYkaQyFcgQayoSIkxvdyMD975LEzH4tcTCKJu+mSne8LK30IQijvM2LIiotr61TzImIz+/0wfUQG5iJ04PRI5OtShaH8E5uzyKll9R/+VXFgPnP5wQ/jRAi0eI9alQ9RpIaqZv0pVhkD9p2/kIb4QAAdyFv6a6MRtFM= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1784576143; c=relaxed/simple; bh=4zcS+WScYQPwZyM+xiHJlRsISzjdbehehXpn4Ix1F20=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version; b=JstrdMmGgPMafbvAkeGIizaNXHDiMYdqbYV+uQZhSNH+RLlJuOpRDj4IT2sB7WU+xZS+mD58J2luS9ySHJ7SGEbmXwgodRfZRnHn+YcVf/M4fmf2hMBFecC2XVpBvD5NHbbfzEc7RQoe3gZLPsXCBoPt7f4W9YnHi4r5h3IVZjM= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=gourry.net; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gourry.net; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gourry.net header.i=@gourry.net header.b=VxO8BlYZ; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.222.173 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=gourry.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gourry.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gourry.net header.i=@gourry.net header.b="VxO8BlYZ" Received: by mail-qk1-f173.google.com with SMTP id af79cd13be357-92e85499ffbso577762785a.0 for ; Mon, 20 Jul 2026 12:35:39 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gourry.net; s=google; t=1784576138; x=1785180938; darn=vger.kernel.org; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:references:in-reply-to :message-id:date:subject:cc:to:from:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to:content-type; bh=KyXKxKoPetSKUj/EMCvw6yCRblDu/3mrIttJowkuK3Y=; b=VxO8BlYZBs2PxviIR4POMtkxgvXfoSVhFrreMn3GW0RTQ/sRuUDROF6NeddrqNfxQl Xx6HGa6ImPNsOhohdMoHyvb90oU1sgjnuirSs3REP4GVVSDTBZyFec3BAZJP0DmzWoVv Fy2FNCQTUvppEj+WgRqfZla8zgJsfOc/2ynw/ThM3y6g+PhEgJgbviGPDxG47j3u1Z6g xXHUJ81ivjfp8e0bjlbTMq5X2MV1af0SrSexIOISA6GotWUadFNbEy8xStT5+VX4kccR XmrOJesGs9CMqNOYEGi/uABzi1yg5xwqpfIL4KMVzffK8wcJ+SQZDGa2Hk9FggoNa9yt AhuQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20251104; t=1784576138; x=1785180938; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:references:in-reply-to :message-id:date:subject:cc:to:from:x-gm-gg:x-gm-message-state:from :to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to:content-type; bh=KyXKxKoPetSKUj/EMCvw6yCRblDu/3mrIttJowkuK3Y=; b=NTMgBPrnvNHMMg92oajzLguc/8IjpziJWXDMnp4o0zZU3SAzhlF+l3Q8/orunC/Xbs HGJpDflBjjYP4w09Bd3CGCAzuv3XVEKWrtirdbPRaVZz5nHN0hmIY1zCeVvQj0Y2n7m2 5mJLVs3ptDLHDEVywdYPzhMAHVUD9w2ztV+lhYXrJzCvlnATDEL96O1PfSm5CrDvPe1V 9n7epoxEs34SmUiLd24/+sewzlxJj6QULSwpt173sO/Sl/QWOIj4Rnb6Q8xLl8t7fEsx 8ydoarNI58Xybs0vRdnebdyn8z5ho5oy5E8w1nkFZcjKNCAhvVzv785gOlc/hfTh0qSc 8rfg== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AHgh+RrVS/WFMWcWgejo5wiFi0eSaRHTcaQfQ+NqbyoAG6Nsqrt4niVoHCGaBmDc88A2fST4UXRRELY6mQUgRAe2OkA=@vger.kernel.org X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YxVo1c2KbLb7E803W6uQYow1sEvFWXNjj6rBn5BTPq2ciFaRBIW PTKa0SRJyuEhUxxillF0Oimu2vIxGLixfQ002fvjQ+xttanDmPntd/KPc0aSAxWgUnU= X-Gm-Gg: AfdE7ckmsPwbgFcf3w8sJHq0MCbA9ysIgTfT1CuJTwGusaYfZhXfUo2F6C5yJ9nkx5U /MhhxWuZy4fgrTjS367gLHuNzP7/0cCsXFZPOWsApWS9BHKQGZIt0xAni8PS985zIM0NnKyVAAl HIMjMDo3Th2sHVFnAO8lz3p+bH4wmx+6dL5CdYczLrUbBGmlZyWqHQ+XJNeGjHVhs7jIHCoDH/P VOyZAmtalqgvYM2IGSv4RvbjnH7XgzNK4lBpy0MmXqEOTfVHCslNQwFgF32lEbkHjqcX/+FEtjz VpLWLA55hekJCmZVpYPtK7sy00If7rGfANILU2EestQvH1peTqPmj27pAJFdShYfMVciJr4amF6 efcdMhdxi1JsNL4tk0Rnke7pL38lbNGJuDm8u0t+vEZqPMbEroPjh+cWyAno9r8Bj3L01HzTGD9 vOoRwz3uzbdZi8jyyG7EhpgTxwJKsSORdSy/TmWb5ItGojXTn45bCtg8/rs9OXNFe/h/5XUMj5a Q== X-Received: by 2002:a05:620a:44c2:b0:930:a963:da73 with SMTP id af79cd13be357-930b419edc2mr1559559685a.50.1784576138219; Mon, 20 Jul 2026 12:35:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gourry-fedora-PF4VCD3F.lan (pool-173-79-60-52.washdc.fios.verizon.net. [173.79.60.52]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id af79cd13be357-930b545e47bsm957792285a.35.2026.07.20.12.35.36 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Mon, 20 Jul 2026 12:35:37 -0700 (PDT) From: Gregory Price To: linux-mm@kvack.org Cc: Zhigang.Luo@amd.com, arun.george@samsung.com, balbirs@nvidia.com, brendan.jackman@linux.dev, yuzenghui@huawei.com, apopple@nvidia.com, alucerop@amd.com, matthew.brost@intel.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org, david@kernel.org, ljs@kernel.org, liam@infradead.org, vbabka@kernel.org, rppt@kernel.org, surenb@google.com, mhocko@suse.com, corbet@lwn.net, skhan@linuxfoundation.org, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, rafael@kernel.org, dakr@kernel.org, djbw@kernel.org, vishal.l.verma@intel.com, dave.jiang@intel.com, alison.schofield@intel.com, osandov@osandov.com, jannh@google.com, pfalcato@suse.de, jackmanb@google.com, hannes@cmpxchg.org, ziy@nvidia.com, pbonzini@redhat.com, osalvador@suse.de, joshua.hahnjy@gmail.com, rakie.kim@sk.com, byungchul@sk.com, gourry@gourry.net, ying.huang@linux.alibaba.com, kasong@tencent.com, qi.zheng@linux.dev, shakeel.butt@linux.dev, baohua@kernel.org, axelrasmussen@google.com, yuanchu@google.com, weixugc@google.com, yury.norov@gmail.com, linux@rasmusvillemoes.dk, longman@redhat.com, ridong.chen@linux.dev, tj@kernel.org, mkoutny@suse.com, sj@kernel.org, jgg@ziepe.ca, jhubbard@nvidia.com, peterx@redhat.com, baolin.wang@linux.alibaba.com, npache@redhat.com, ryan.roberts@arm.com, dev.jain@arm.com, lance.yang@linux.dev, usama.arif@linux.dev, xu.xin16@zte.com.cn, chengming.zhou@linux.dev, roman.gushchin@linux.dev, muchun.song@linux.dev, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, driver-core@lists.linux.dev, nvdimm@lists.linux.dev, linux-cxl@vger.kernel.org, linux-debuggers@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org, cgroups@vger.kernel.org, damon@lists.linux.dev, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, kernel-team@meta.com Subject: [PATCH v5 23/36] mm/mempolicy: apply policy at the kernel zone for private-node binds Date: Mon, 20 Jul 2026 15:34:17 -0400 Message-ID: <20260720193431.3841992-24-gourry@gourry.net> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.55.0 In-Reply-To: <20260720193431.3841992-1-gourry@gourry.net> References: <20260720193431.3841992-1-gourry@gourry.net> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-debuggers@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit apply_policy_zone() raises dynamic_policy_zone to ZONE_MOVABLE when none of a policy's nodes have non-movable memory, so a bind to movable-only node does not force kernel-zone allocations onto a zone that cannot satisfy them - resulting retries forever (livelock). The current code uses N_HIGH_MEMORY to denote eligibility, but private nodes are deliberately not in N_HIGH_MEMORY nor N_NORMAL_MEMORY. This means a private node onlined into ZONE_NORMAL is judged as movable-only. This means a policy set with set_mempolicy() binding a private node with ZONE_NORMAL memory will shunt otherwise eligible allocations (like the task's page tables) back to N_MEMORY nodes. This also becomes relevant for in-kernel users that want non-movable memory (such as KVM placing pinned VM memory solely on a private node). Add policy_private_has_kernel_zone() to consult the actual zones of the policy's private nodes and keep the policy applied at lower zones when a kernel-zoned private node can satisfy the allocation. Only a mempolicy binding a private node pays the zone scan, all other mempolicies preserve fast-path performance. Additionally: update the comments in apply_policy_zone for clarity, because this particular policy mechanism is very confusing. Signed-off-by: Gregory Price --- mm/mempolicy.c | 48 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------ 1 file changed, 42 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) diff --git a/mm/mempolicy.c b/mm/mempolicy.c index 90110e9761122..e83c2c7a94c1d 100644 --- a/mm/mempolicy.c +++ b/mm/mempolicy.c @@ -2091,6 +2091,34 @@ bool vma_policy_mof(struct vm_area_struct *vma) return mof; } +/* + * true if any policy *private* node can satisfy a !__GFP_MOVABLE allocation. + * Policies without private nodes (~MPOL_F_PRIVATE) always return false. + * + * This provides a way for otherwise-bound kernel allocations to make their + * way onto private nodes with ZONE_NORMAL memory without having to audit + * every caller. The cost is a zone scan for private nodes in the mask. + */ +static bool policy_private_has_kernel_zone(const struct mempolicy *pol) +{ + int nid; + + if (!(pol->flags & MPOL_F_PRIVATE)) + return false; + + for_each_node_mask(nid, pol->nodes) { + pg_data_t *pgdat = NODE_DATA(nid); + enum zone_type zt; + + if (!node_is_private(nid)) + continue; + for (zt = ZONE_NORMAL; zt < ZONE_MOVABLE; zt++) + if (managed_zone(&pgdat->node_zones[zt])) + return true; + } + return false; +} + bool apply_policy_zone(struct mempolicy *policy, enum zone_type zone) { enum zone_type dynamic_policy_zone = policy_zone; @@ -2098,14 +2126,22 @@ bool apply_policy_zone(struct mempolicy *policy, enum zone_type zone) BUG_ON(dynamic_policy_zone == ZONE_MOVABLE); /* - * if policy->nodes has movable memory only, - * we apply policy when gfp_zone(gfp) = ZONE_MOVABLE only. + * dynamic_policy_zone is the lowest zone this policy is enforced for, + * allocations below it ignore the nodemask and fall back freely. + * + * If all policy-nodes are movable-only (all ZONE_MOVABLE), raise the + * dynamic_policy_zone to ZONE_MOVABLE so that only movable allocations + * stay bound - otherwise this would force kernel-zone allocations + * (e.g. page tables) onto a zone that cannot satisfy them. This + * results in allocation failure and retry loop (livelock). * - * policy->nodes is intersect with node_states[N_MEMORY]. - * so if the following test fails, it implies - * policy->nodes has movable memory only. + * N_HIGH_MEMORY tells us "has a non-movable zone" for ordinary nodes. + * Private nodes are deliberately excluded from N_HIGH_MEMORY, so we + * need to check their actual zones - a kernel-zoned private node can + * hold the allocation and must keep the policy applied. */ - if (!nodes_intersects(policy->nodes, node_states[N_HIGH_MEMORY])) + if (!nodes_intersects(policy->nodes, node_states[N_HIGH_MEMORY]) && + !policy_private_has_kernel_zone(policy)) dynamic_policy_zone = ZONE_MOVABLE; return zone >= dynamic_policy_zone; -- 2.53.0-Meta