Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Thu, 25 Apr 2019 14:09:08 -0700
From:   Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To:     Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>
Cc:     Andrey Ryabinin <aryabinin@virtuozzo.com>, linux-mm@kvack.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] mm/page_alloc: fix never set ALLOC_NOFRAGMENT flag
Message-Id: <20190425140908.7da3c4e52663196c7b914b00@linux-foundation.org>
In-Reply-To: <20190424234052.GW18914@techsingularity.net>
References: <20190423120806.3503-1-aryabinin@virtuozzo.com>
        <20190423120806.3503-2-aryabinin@virtuozzo.com>
        <20190423120143.f555f77df02a266ba2a7f1fc@linux-foundation.org>
        <20190424090403.GS18914@techsingularity.net>
        <20190424154624.f1084195c36684453a557718@linux-foundation.org>
        <20190424234052.GW18914@techsingularity.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, 25 Apr 2019 00:40:53 +0100 Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net> wrote:

> On Wed, Apr 24, 2019 at 03:46:24PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Wed, 24 Apr 2019 10:04:03 +0100 Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net> wrote:
> > 
> > > On Tue, Apr 23, 2019 at 12:01:43PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > > On Tue, 23 Apr 2019 15:08:06 +0300 Andrey Ryabinin <aryabinin@virtuozzo.com> wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > > Commit 0a79cdad5eb2 ("mm: use alloc_flags to record if kswapd can wake")
> > > > > removed setting of the ALLOC_NOFRAGMENT flag. Bring it back.
> > > > 
> > > > What are the runtime effects of this fix?
> > > 
> > > The runtime effect is that ALLOC_NOFRAGMENT behaviour is restored so
> > > that allocations are spread across local zones to avoid fragmentation
> > > due to mixing pageblocks as long as possible.
> > 
> > OK, thanks.  Is this worth a -stable backport?
> 
> Yes, but only for 5.0 obviously and both should be included if that is
> the case. I did not push for it initially as problems in this area are
> hard for a general user to detect and people have not complained about
> 5.0's fragmentation handling.

Ah, OK.  0a79cdad5eb2 didn't have a -stable tag so I suppose we can
leave this patch un-stabled.

If they went and backported 0a79cdad5eb2 anyway, let's hope the scripts
are smart enough to catch this patch's Fixes: link.