On Tue, Jan 30, 2024 at 01:18:30PM +0800, Huang, Ying wrote:

Gregory Price [off-list ref] writes:

quoted

For normal interleave, this isn't an issue because it always proceeds to
the next node. The same is not true of weighted interleave, which may
have a hanging weight in task->il_weight.

So, I added a check as follows,

node_isset(current->il_prev, policy->nodes)

If prev node is removed from nodemask, allocation will proceed to the
next node.  Otherwise, it's safe to use current->il_weight.  

Funny enough I have this on one of my branches and dropped it, but after
digging through everything - this should be sufficient.

I'll just add il_weight next to il_prev and have a new set of patches
out today. Code is already there, just needs one last cleanup pass.

~Gregory