On 10/25/18 1:17 AM, Andrew Morton wrote:

On Mon, 22 Oct 2018 15:27:54 +0200 Vlastimil Babka [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

quoted

: Moreover the oriinal code allowed to trigger
: 	WARN_ON_ONCE(policy->mode == MPOL_BIND && (gfp & __GFP_THISNODE));
: in policy_node if the requested node (e.g. cpu local one) was outside of
: the mbind nodemask. This is not possible now. We haven't heard about any
: such warning yet so it is unlikely that it happens but still a signal of
: a wrong code layering.

Ah, as I said in the other mail, I think it's inaccurate, the warning
was not possible to hit.

There's also a slight difference wrt MPOL_BIND. The previous code would
avoid using __GFP_THISNODE if the local node was outside of
policy_nodemask(). After your patch __GFP_THISNODE is avoided for all
MPOL_BIND policies. So there's a difference that if local node is
actually allowed by the bind policy's nodemask, previously
__GFP_THISNODE would be added, but now it won't be. I don't think it
matters that much though, but maybe the changelog could say that
(instead of the inaccurate note about warning). Note the other policy
where nodemask is relevant is MPOL_INTERLEAVE, and that's unchanged by
this patch.

So the above could go into the changelog, yes?

Yeah.

quoted

When that's addressed, you can add

What is it that you'd like to see addressed?  Purely changelog updates?

Right.

quoted

Acked-by: Vlastimil Babka <redacted>

Thanks.