From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 425792580CA for ; Thu, 31 Jul 2025 18:45:36 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1753987539; cv=none; b=S+V21s3AffurF+qJJYxaEBxgRdIspeyBqY4TZRqGRf72txEV9P/3iYAB5mMRP05dQX80ii2uehqqLAT6MJyJhp1SEcPqSNKFG7ylQs46vcu8r/MyDl3iOlu/sR4kb0A7W9uIPz2p59QtMv+O8XPeEgiY1gxXVqezV779eJnjK10= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1753987539; c=relaxed/simple; bh=EDF5fbjVVtLHDax6DWwi8zVjLgTT3NYO+yAT3GKnzGw=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:Message-Id:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version; b=ndpU+W31ddwp2+6aqodTnb+yGUzA6gbQfi8Hd2e8rBkdPM2Kb1C3F17u5h7Y8/3xt8bItfpabptmoClXyIeo0iOWTLXTZcodB75Mv00v6CEJomAC833XOAk5bttkGOz8KfieRtWoATQocHeK0lZQBTwiU8J7HGSICH5DezdJLOY= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=bTE571R3; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="bTE571R3" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 82069C4CEF7; Thu, 31 Jul 2025 18:45:36 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1753987536; bh=EDF5fbjVVtLHDax6DWwi8zVjLgTT3NYO+yAT3GKnzGw=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=bTE571R3uL8yVkEByfBkisQXXirJ/lh/NmmQvnlNQupf9TEy5rzWuRr9qcal1irWf S6rbnKD0SyB7borVmo/qPY8kbJHP//vl9LB8TlqJuUhy4zu9E6W0unIxp22DFwMb7B eR1GS1Lg5YMXRptg8zNAvNHTDR31y3p4Hstl69o4LhjmqJ2scrcIZV9qy6gxtIC7N6 HNIi0yWiA2jcnNjuL13K4aH4GGhyjb2v4hiNU6P3OmNq+/5AQLfjtwrJSoHppCasFY IbfcSllb7OomUMmxK78WopGDkfVb0q8SQ59wHJpbiS+UyVv42NsSj4gO4lXLsT4Nuy 87Y5QC54gdWJg== From: SeongJae Park To: "Huang, Ying" Cc: SeongJae Park , Joshua Hahn , Andrew Morton , David Hildenbrand , Johannes Weiner , Zi Yan , Matthew Brost , Rakie Kim , Byungchul Park , Gregory Price , Alistair Popple , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, kernel-team@meta.com, Dave Hansen Subject: Re: [PATCH] mempolicy: Clarify what RECLAIM_ZONE means Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2025 11:45:33 -0700 Message-Id: <20250731184533.16419-1-sj@kernel.org> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.39.5 In-Reply-To: <87tt2t9lkp.fsf@DESKTOP-5N7EMDA> References: Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit On Thu, 31 Jul 2025 09:48:54 +0800 "Huang, Ying" wrote: > Joshua Hahn writes: [...] > > On that note, one thing that I felt was slightly undercaptured in > > Documentation/admin-guide is what "zone reclaim" actually means. What it does > > is of course well captured by its name, but it misses the nuance of preferring > > reclaim over fallback allocation. > > > > Actually the whole motivation behind all of this conversation is because I saw > > zone reclaim preventing allocation into a second node in a 2-NUMA node system > > and was a bit confused until I understood what the implication of having > > zone reclaim was. > > Yes. It's good to improve the document. If it makes you confusing, it > may make others confusing too. +1 Thanks, SJ [...]