On 01/30/2017 11:24 PM, Dave Hansen wrote:
> On 01/29/2017 07:35 PM, Anshuman Khandual wrote:
>> +            if ((new_pol->mode == MPOL_BIND)
>> +                    && nodemask_has_cdm(new_pol->v.nodes))
>> +                    set_vm_cdm(vma);
> So, if you did:
> 
>       mbind(addr, PAGE_SIZE, MPOL_BIND, all_nodes, ...);
>       mbind(addr, PAGE_SIZE, MPOL_BIND, one_non_cdm_node, ...);
> 
> You end up with a VMA that can never have KSM done on it, etc...  Even
> though there's no good reason for it.  I guess /proc/$pid/smaps might be
> able to help us figure out what was going on here, but that still seems
> like an awful lot of damage.

Agreed, this VMA should not remain tagged after the second call. It does
not make sense. For this kind of scenarios we can re-evaluate the VMA
tag every time the nodemask change is attempted. But if we are looking for
some runtime re-evaluation then we need to steal some cycles are during
general VMA processing opportunity points like merging and split to do
the necessary re-evaluation. Should do we do these kind two kinds of
re-evaluation to be more optimal ?

Reply via email to