From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-qt1-f175.google.com (mail-qt1-f175.google.com [209.85.160.175]) (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 880EB42DA52 for ; Wed, 22 Jul 2026 20:56:52 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.160.175 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1784753814; cv=none; b=ihGsqhC4mD7tp6e4KDCXA7wnyeAnNv4u56AzB5hVAOBr3ZjdossmlvuOU/94HlgGhdEqEhhH6ojx95HJzbFF7zrXGalVBXzeU59ydCtm5srI1uVYE1wYiTEf/Z7XUNzQF/sILEK5cHKenR587Qh49uOeQPnBzF0Wkykzjne2y4U= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1784753814; c=relaxed/simple; bh=s8/wCDafUQ7pmN88abnD2Ydl0D4cpNmsjgZZBVN4G00=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=I3G5a3i5D5MjoadszVbJdbS3p/xM/vf6rAeNGaUrYpvqiJK66SLPOSsceDEDHiV/FZrnpDOi659yvxr1+ngsxBMguz6YweI9UjTddvtTVLOoAPGtZ8HpSqeUIgQUSqUrHGuwvC/o1JW8CIBF402w+h81x6b064QQuOj34Fz8Xjo= 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=BmbxhrHw; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.160.175 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="BmbxhrHw" Received: by mail-qt1-f175.google.com with SMTP id d75a77b69052e-51c2149571dso79781151cf.3 for ; Wed, 22 Jul 2026 13:56:52 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gourry.net; s=google; t=1784753811; x=1785358611; darn=vger.kernel.org; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:content-type:mime-version :references:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date:from:to:cc:subject :date:message-id:reply-to:content-type; bh=DrWtospFmR1X6Ml2Vs8JTWDG5C2VdzRczI8oq8UdJr8=; b=BmbxhrHwS6SGD+DstaxN9aum0F+qVmFaCCLRCAesmHXK1x1tbM8o4VXAY3bTRgTam9 XN/lXuukJ8njiId9TQhkCaRPDHdLvVG/UbqfgTdVJ7GSf/bhXuLy1McqVIhavwwBnm+u eH9ysztsnbb3Y0hPkS5OJzKx0qvgsrYFdGfqtYdAbumPyibsoupEOFlrVRXIIl2k70T3 EAOge8mNby2tH4tbCTbQnpGhXvpzaKnk8AB4lrEjLDfvD+NmiYvFPPRjv4XfQeD4YzrJ ldCwOWXJsoNHETHoVs0VPJZNiN+TJ5HMUYIlSh7Q19XCK5ykMuHxhknCy8215sucxrl2 8/jg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20251104; t=1784753811; x=1785358611; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:content-type:mime-version :references:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-gg :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to :content-type; bh=DrWtospFmR1X6Ml2Vs8JTWDG5C2VdzRczI8oq8UdJr8=; b=XVe352yyOPRIt1l0OF7U/SdHenkr8WibU1QJ3Sw/poXKdJNXlh3QdWhI3FeouJGyxv t4P3lr8aBfetQytk0LxEHdxiH7TXxNQ1/1FIFCmcUMLJv676bYbeYs1v71HI2+kHrLKw uLA6N0Zw+8YEUI5T1zHFnPgY4fGWbMJwYLfMXMqVzOhS9ef8xQRm28yCqq0DoSb6Wbvr 31mE9BKZdBW0vTKACW2i/XjpcTQisyq3CwgzYtdl3MVloJvBoeAbTJwSbtTtlRQunMyY p/LM6jd4b8bVpZfl7m8y7VtyWuzMcfLKDU71JR5Zhqtl1GPzx7icJWMHZt/o7g4fWTUb E7Sw== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AHgh+RrL3AGypgthJ55HEhzcITDPaRJoyQJI4UEqGAOOGMEP4SQdcMVweQGV3RCPQjjLurH4FuyDcd9s5AyHnVJV@vger.kernel.org X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YwTGC0ZRqBc5VJpoiRBC1X+NeiBUxJCZMbOyHGG2TomE0qC6U5S /ZGoiEPVwQbS82Rdq90wgqnbvs3E8RNiQg7wTwnxbrM/qWMRNGTAwVUyFEZKJw8tSVw= X-Gm-Gg: AR+sD12OBovNgbRUuGpjwegnqaCuOQQaJC+zsn4wG3ztmnaFLYET/fDE15aUpkBYoua 3nPeOmGnOBdj54l5dkdUTn63jVdxEqBXCgUwexeJti1FUpMGEhYRMkMBnGAKGJFdhIOLtN4PB0u xBoEivOf02Ws9iHsWjnXZm5CI+L70ifF0xAAXkkOedg7BuPuPgrDslFpcGkLcAlKDIjR8q84yBZ srYBhQAqqBHHER+aq0umH0BZ2EUiobiANiTgxmq499QvcfmarOzG9iAyLJPbWkt3hmRLx9EThvv uTY5+v3mf/qwS8vDdZIpmsyr4XXmoZ8ZzHUjt7lX3Q2nrDWLpyf6QoDyoboVxfinDeeJzh1u9xy knNBW0TJxzqCN4ddJLLbIIFBDYRVUr8BTPr80YaBIh4hJMvPBs7ThV0dZvN6UioB2huDYHrfhd1 5ZplJyZlxok2lZ+t3ovj1oqrm+RGyQIEFvbz0WzRjVsGiu6n+l5FVZjxj9p9/knvqxzbG5 X-Received: by 2002:a05:622a:997:b0:519:5680:1b5 with SMTP id d75a77b69052e-5283de4650emr1484841cf.21.1784753811471; Wed, 22 Jul 2026 13:56:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gourry-fedora-PF4VCD3F (pool-173-79-60-52.washdc.fios.verizon.net. [173.79.60.52]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 6a1803df08f44-907ba672806sm29772246d6.0.2026.07.22.13.56.49 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 22 Jul 2026 13:56:51 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2026 16:56:45 -0400 From: Gregory Price To: Richard Cheng Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, 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, 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: Re: [PATCH v5 00/36] Private Memory NUMA Nodes Message-ID: References: <20260720193431.3841992-1-gourry@gourry.net> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: On Wed, Jul 22, 2026 at 11:40:06AM -0400, Gregory Price wrote: > On Wed, Jul 22, 2026 at 10:20:00PM +0800, Richard Cheng wrote: > > > > I saw the reply in patch 5, so in fact there's not only one > > dedicate zonelist, but numerous ? > > I raise the question because zonelist was supposed to be a > > global, unbypasssable thing in MM design, but now what you > > are trying to do is to seperate the whole global list into several > > parts ? > > > > Can you explain why in current design you don't consider to support > > something like ZONELIST_PRIVATE[n]={0, .. ,n-1} ? that's my imagination > > of what a global zonelist should look like, no matter private or non. > > > > First let me say that there's nothing that prevents us from doing this, > and we *could* make this the default case - but this decision was > intentional by me. > You caught me on something here - I am wrong about my own code. I described to you how I originally implemented zonelist isolation, which I walked back when I was testing mempolicy and demotion. The current code and the comments in the code are correct, we get the following zonelists. N_MEMORY : 0,1 N_MEMORY_PRIVATE: 2,3 ZONELIST_PRIVATE[0] = {0,1,2,3} ZONELIST_PRIVATE[1] = {1,0,2,3} ZONELIST_PRIVATE[2] = {2,0,1,3} ZONELIST_PRIVATE[3] = {3,0,1,2} Meaning everything except for MPOL_F_RELATIVE_NODES works (because of cpuset isolation, but more on this in a moment). So what I shipped here is what you are describing. Looking back at my notes - I realized a few things that lead me to walk back that isolation: 1) mempolicy makes more sense this way. 2) reclaim/demotion is easier to implement without isolation. 3) The individual service checks and nodelists handle the rest. 4) It overally just makes more sense. If something breaks isolation it's because there's a bug, not because of a structural issue. For example in demotion we do this: demote_folio_list(): /* Get demotion targets, find the best one, and demote */ node_get_allowed_targets(pgdat, &allowed_mask); target_nid = next_demotion_node(pgdat->node_id, &allowed_mask); migrate_pages(demote_folios, alloc_demote_folio, ...); Where the first step already filters on CAP_DEMOTION. The result is still clean - no special iterators needed. What I realized from your questions here is that since i walked back the zonelist isolation, I think i can actually include any CAP_USER_NUMA node in cpuset.mems and allow parititioning fairly trivially. I think this might be the last majority complexity falling out. Thank you for the questions - this has helped. ~Gregory