On Wed 05-12-18 11:24:53, David Rientjes wrote: > On Wed, 5 Dec 2018, Michal Hocko wrote: > > > > > At minimum do not remove the cleanup part which consolidates the gfp > > > > hadnling to a single place. There is no real reason to have the > > > > __GFP_THISNODE ugliness outside of alloc_hugepage_direct_gfpmask. > > > > > > > > > > The __GFP_THISNODE usage is still confined to > > > alloc_hugepage_direct_gfpmask() for the thp fault path, we no longer set > > > it in alloc_pages_vma() as done before the cleanup. > > > > Why should be new_page any different? > > > > To match alloc_new_node_page() which does it correctly and does not change > the behavior of mbind() that the cleanup did, which used > alloc_hugepage_vma() to get the __GFP_THISNODE behavior. If there is a > reason mbind() is somehow different wrt allocating hugepages locally, I > think that should be a separate patch, but the goal of this patch is to > revert all the behavioral change that caused hugepages to be allocated > remotely.
If the __GFP_THISNODE should be really used then it should be applied to all other types of pages. Not only THP. And as such done in a separate patch. Not a part of the revert. The cleanup was meant to unify THP allocations and that is why I object to reverting it as a part of this work. -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs
