From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DFF68C48292 for ; Mon, 5 Feb 2024 17:50:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 573B56B008A; Mon, 5 Feb 2024 12:50:19 -0500 (EST) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 4FC446B008C; Mon, 5 Feb 2024 12:50:19 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 39D066B0092; Mon, 5 Feb 2024 12:50:19 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from relay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0013.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.13]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 26B936B008A for ; Mon, 5 Feb 2024 12:50:19 -0500 (EST) Received: from smtpin10.hostedemail.com (a10.router.float.18 [10.200.18.1]) by unirelay01.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CFF361C058F for ; Mon, 5 Feb 2024 17:50:18 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 81758489316.10.1486D15 Received: from gentwo.org (gentwo.org [62.72.0.81]) by imf08.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1985C160016 for ; Mon, 5 Feb 2024 17:50:16 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: imf08.hostedemail.com; dkim=none; dmarc=fail reason="No valid SPF, No valid DKIM" header.from=linux.com (policy=none); spf=softfail (imf08.hostedemail.com: 62.72.0.81 is neither permitted nor denied by domain of cl@linux.com) smtp.mailfrom=cl@linux.com ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hostedemail.com; s=arc-20220608; t=1707155417; h=from:from:sender:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=ICeKHj3QIMrl3Gg8Potz50Sw1T0JenccbZ6VFluAGi0=; b=OO0pV+dYjIOO25rc1kd0SVuwk50DwdJ2jtbI9jCFpRPPBBIpI+68QfQgczCX9Mw+hB/T0Y NwORL0uo1AlVEhS4gyWvgdYuhYL+AVY2ik2Qws/jguLiSmK5SljPL4sq0F6R/FV0Sh+6CH vq+ibVTVTCV3Jx7+jNq4shrZKv9lI4k= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; imf08.hostedemail.com; dkim=none; dmarc=fail reason="No valid SPF, No valid DKIM" header.from=linux.com (policy=none); spf=softfail (imf08.hostedemail.com: 62.72.0.81 is neither permitted nor denied by domain of cl@linux.com) smtp.mailfrom=cl@linux.com ARC-Seal: i=1; s=arc-20220608; d=hostedemail.com; t=1707155417; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=Bpamy0vs4LapMTf9WSrGZjzlKZcoVyDXJ75Zaa02Zkqb6NjgY9yKUrSgabwntedVSVOC+5 UQJxYHeg6klG6KNkgd609+ctzEBqpWI31MevTfcEzyEqUJ/5Tbx4jcTORRDo8FJxQ9dcZm MCLrQjCuOyepeqsTawcVeFJE5A5/0qE= Received: by gentwo.org (Postfix, from userid 1003) id 9CEE540A90; Mon, 5 Feb 2024 09:50:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by gentwo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C45240789; Mon, 5 Feb 2024 09:50:15 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2024 09:50:15 -0800 (PST) From: "Christoph Lameter (Ampere)" To: "Song, Xiongwei" cc: Chengming Zhou , Vlastimil Babka , Yosry Ahmed , Steven Rostedt , LKML , "linux-mm@kvack.org" , Andrew Morton , Linus Torvalds , Kees Cook , David Rientjes , Hyeonggon Yoo <42.hyeyoo@gmail.com>, Chengming Zhou , Zheng Yejian Subject: RE: Do we still need SLAB_MEM_SPREAD (and possibly others)? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: <20240131172027.10f64405@gandalf.local.home> <61af19ca-5f9a-40da-a04d-b04ed27b8754@suse.cz> <698633db-b066-4f75-b201-7b785819277b@linux.dev> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-Rspam-User: X-Rspamd-Server: rspam12 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 1985C160016 X-Stat-Signature: gccje6h467x6ue34ow9sntrsbakcjihn X-HE-Tag: 1707155416-344797 X-HE-Meta: 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 sjeMJB1f /h6seC8Ogzv+8tfLKkwIqp9QbZlBjQG9818WjNLPoe9+yRvFbfzmwGzNXejaRVN7sAcFIV9J8ZtIRPUpsXYMNxewxoGW/A/i2bcFSpJZAIhnmhMfsHCjNW+Q5S8+Ygu0kOH3KxRJQIFauIztCaT4F7seFDWcEVZEw+tQIwJoXEr7OK3/sv+w7OjMo6lBGJ+X5Y/IRtx1oBz1jhb5QtAAkxECes0vuvj63I7tUW0GTKs6UeKKaL3R1tDhu2UytCFDfIc1Dibk2rTp5lKa0lOGeuyc0nRvKZPYJwrgTk5+psDjYfB8ALNE9YFDCw3G+JAheV/kWfTw3MzRBsgrvAHUndx/8hjs22FByo0IPP6CbhQ9xsCu2z+ooj8R7SA== X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: On Sun, 4 Feb 2024, Song, Xiongwei wrote: > Once SLAB_MEM_SPREAD is removed, IMO, cpuset.memory_spread_slab is useless. SLAB_MEM_SPREAD does not do anything anymore. SLUB relies on the "spreading" via the page allocator memory policies instead of doing its own like SLAB used to do. What does FILE_SPREAD_SLAB do? Dont see anything there either.