From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wg0-f49.google.com (mail-wg0-f49.google.com [74.125.82.49]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A18A06B006C for ; Tue, 14 Oct 2014 13:39:16 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-wg0-f49.google.com with SMTP id x12so11455052wgg.8 for ; Tue, 14 Oct 2014 10:39:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from kirsi1.inet.fi (mta-out1.inet.fi. [62.71.2.234]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id fq11si22006851wjc.169.2014.10.14.10.39.14 for ; Tue, 14 Oct 2014 10:39:14 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 14 Oct 2014 20:38:37 +0300 From: "Kirill A. Shutemov" Subject: Re: [BUG] mm, thp: khugepaged can't allocate on requested node when confined to a cpuset Message-ID: <20141014173837.GA8919@node.dhcp.inet.fi> References: <20141008191050.GK3778@sgi.com> <20141014114828.GA6524@node.dhcp.inet.fi> <20141014145435.GA7369@worktop.fdxtended.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20141014145435.GA7369@worktop.fdxtended.com> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Peter Zijlstra Cc: Alex Thorlton , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Andrew Morton , Mel Gorman , Rik van Riel , Ingo Molnar , "Kirill A. Shutemov" , Hugh Dickins , Bob Liu , Johannes Weiner , linux-mm@kvack.org On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 04:54:35PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > Is there a reason why we should respect cpuset limitation for kernel > > threads? > > Yes, because we want to allow isolating CPUs from 'random' activity. Okay, it makes sense for cpus_allowed. But we're talking about mems_allowed, right? > > > Should we bypass cpuset for PF_KTHREAD completely? > > No. That'll break stuff. Like what? -- Kirill A. Shutemov -- 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: email@kvack.org