From: Lee Schermerhorn <Lee.Schermerhorn@hp.com>
To: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
Cc: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Christoph Lameter <clameter@sgi.com>, Paul Jackson <pj@sgi.com>,
Mel Gorman <mel@csn.ul.ie>,
torvalds@linux-foundation.org, Eric Whitney <eric.whitney@hp.com>
Subject: Re: [2.6.24 regression][BUGFIX] numactl --interleave=all doesn't works on memoryless node.
Date: Wed, 06 Feb 2008 11:11:21 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1202314282.5453.37.camel@localhost> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.1.00.0802051813250.19033@chino.kir.corp.google.com>
On Tue, 2008-02-05 at 18:17 -0800, David Rientjes wrote:
> On Tue, 5 Feb 2008, Lee Schermerhorn wrote:
>
> > Index: Linux/mm/mempolicy.c
> > ===================================================================
> > --- Linux.orig/mm/mempolicy.c 2008-02-05 11:25:17.000000000 -0500
> > +++ Linux/mm/mempolicy.c 2008-02-05 16:03:11.000000000 -0500
> > @@ -131,7 +131,7 @@ static int mpol_check_policy(int mode, n
> > return -EINVAL;
> > break;
> > }
> > - return nodes_subset(*nodes, node_states[N_HIGH_MEMORY]) ? 0 : -EINVAL;
> > + return 0;
> > }
> >
> > /* Generate a custom zonelist for the BIND policy. */
>
> This change will be necessary when the nodemask passed from the syscall is
> saved in the struct mempolicy as the intent of the application as well.
>
> > @@ -188,8 +188,6 @@ static struct mempolicy *mpol_new(int mo
> > switch (mode) {
> > case MPOL_INTERLEAVE:
> > policy->v.nodes = *nodes;
> > - nodes_and(policy->v.nodes, policy->v.nodes,
> > - node_states[N_HIGH_MEMORY]);
> > if (nodes_weight(policy->v.nodes) == 0) {
> > kmem_cache_free(policy_cache, policy);
> > return ERR_PTR(-EINVAL);
> > @@ -426,9 +424,13 @@ static int contextualize_policy(int mode
> > if (!nodes)
> > return 0;
> >
> > + /*
> > + * Restrict the nodes to the allowed nodes in the cpuset.
> > + * This is guaranteed to be a subset of nodes with memory.
> > + */
> > cpuset_update_task_memory_state();
> > - if (!cpuset_nodes_subset_current_mems_allowed(*nodes))
> > - return -EINVAL;
> > + nodes_and(*nodes, *nodes, cpuset_current_mems_allowed);
> > +
> > return mpol_check_policy(mode, nodes);
> > }
> >
>
> I would defer the intersection until later because contextualize_policy()
> is called before mpol_new() so we have no struct mempolicy to save the
> intent in. It doesn't matter for the sake of this change, I know, but you
> could move this intersection to mpol_new() and give us an opportunity to
> store the user's nodemask in the mempolicy with a one-line change and get
> the same desired result.
Hi, David:
I wanted to avoid a major restructuring of the code for this patch.
However, now that both do_mbind() and do_set_mempolicy() both call
contextualize_policy() [which calls mpol_check_policy()] immediately
before calling mpol_new(), I agree we can push this "contextualization"
down there. I would like to defer this to another patch--perhaps as
part of Paul's rework of mempolicy and cpusets.
Note that there is another caller of mpol_new() --
mpol_shared_policy_init(). We'll need to decide whether that call needs
to be contextualized, as it constructs a policy from the tmpfs or
hugetlbfs superblock, as specified on the mount command [or kernel
command line?]. As this is a privileged operation, one could argue that
it should be exempt from cpuset constraints.
>
> You can now remove cpuset_nodes_subset_current_mems_allowed() from
> linux/cpuset.h.
>
> > @@ -797,7 +799,7 @@ static long do_mbind(unsigned long start
> > if (end == start)
> > return 0;
> >
> > - if (mpol_check_policy(mode, nmask))
> > + if (contextualize_policy(mode, nmask))
> > return -EINVAL;
> >
> > new = mpol_new(mode, nmask);
> > @@ -915,10 +917,6 @@ asmlinkage long sys_mbind(unsigned long
> > err = get_nodes(&nodes, nmask, maxnode);
> > if (err)
> > return err;
> > -#ifdef CONFIG_CPUSETS
> > - /* Restrict the nodes to the allowed nodes in the cpuset */
> > - nodes_and(nodes, nodes, current->mems_allowed);
> > -#endif
> > return do_mbind(start, len, mode, &nodes, flags);
> > }
> >
>
> Looks good, thanks for doing this.
As I mentioned to Christoph, I'll post a new version that I think
handles the error conditions better.
Later,
Lee
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-02-06 16:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 43+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-02-02 8:12 [2.6.24-rc8-mm1][regression?] numactl --interleave=all doesn't works on memoryless node KOSAKI Motohiro
2008-02-02 9:09 ` Andi Kleen
2008-02-02 9:37 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2008-02-02 11:30 ` Andi Kleen
2008-02-04 19:03 ` Christoph Lameter
2008-02-04 18:20 ` Lee Schermerhorn
2008-02-05 9:26 ` [2.6.24 regression][BUGFIX] " KOSAKI Motohiro
2008-02-05 21:57 ` Lee Schermerhorn
2008-02-05 22:12 ` Christoph Lameter
2008-02-06 16:00 ` Lee Schermerhorn
2008-02-05 22:15 ` Paul Jackson
2008-02-06 2:17 ` David Rientjes
2008-02-06 16:11 ` Lee Schermerhorn [this message]
2008-02-06 6:49 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2008-02-06 17:38 ` Lee Schermerhorn
2008-02-07 8:31 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2008-02-08 19:45 ` [PATCH 2.6.24-mm1] Mempolicy: silently restrict nodemask to allowed nodes V3 Lee Schermerhorn
2008-02-09 18:11 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2008-02-10 5:29 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2008-02-10 5:49 ` Greg KH
2008-02-10 7:42 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-02-10 10:31 ` Andrew Morton
2008-02-11 16:47 ` Lee Schermerhorn
2008-02-12 4:30 ` [PATCH for 2.6.24][regression fix] " KOSAKI Motohiro
2008-02-12 5:06 ` David Rientjes
2008-02-12 5:07 ` Andrew Morton
2008-02-12 13:18 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2008-02-05 10:17 ` [2.6.24-rc8-mm1][regression?] numactl --interleave=all doesn't works on memoryless node Paul Jackson
2008-02-05 11:14 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2008-02-05 19:56 ` David Rientjes
2008-02-05 20:51 ` Paul Jackson
2008-02-05 21:03 ` David Rientjes
2008-02-05 21:33 ` Paul Jackson
2008-02-05 22:04 ` Lee Schermerhorn
2008-02-05 22:44 ` David Rientjes
2008-02-05 22:50 ` Paul Jackson
2008-02-05 14:31 ` Mel Gorman
2008-02-05 15:23 ` Lee Schermerhorn
2008-02-05 18:12 ` Christoph Lameter
2008-02-05 18:27 ` Lee Schermerhorn
2008-02-05 19:04 ` Christoph Lameter
2008-02-05 19:15 ` Paul Jackson
2008-02-05 20:06 ` David Rientjes
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1202314282.5453.37.camel@localhost \
--to=lee.schermerhorn@hp.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=clameter@sgi.com \
--cc=eric.whitney@hp.com \
--cc=kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mel@csn.ul.ie \
--cc=pj@sgi.com \
--cc=rientjes@google.com \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox