[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20080702182909.D163.KOSAKI.MOTOHIRO@jp.fujitsu.com>
Date: Wed, 02 Jul 2008 21:01:59 +0900
From: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>
To: Andy Whitcroft <apw@...dowen.org>
Cc: kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Mel Gorman <mel@....ul.ie>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] capture pages freed during direct reclaim for allocation by the reclaimer
Hi Andy,
I feel this is interesting patch.
but I'm worry about it become increase OOM occur.
What do you think?
and, Why don't you make patch against -mm tree?
> diff --git a/mm/page_alloc.c b/mm/page_alloc.c
> index d73e1e1..1ac703d 100644
> --- a/mm/page_alloc.c
> +++ b/mm/page_alloc.c
> @@ -410,6 +410,51 @@ static inline int page_is_buddy(struct page *page, struct page *buddy,
> * -- wli
> */
>
> +static inline void __capture_one_page(struct list_head *capture_list,
> + struct page *page, struct zone *zone, unsigned int order)
> +{
> + unsigned long page_idx;
> + unsigned long order_size = 1UL << order;
> +
> + if (unlikely(PageCompound(page)))
> + destroy_compound_page(page, order);
> +
> + page_idx = page_to_pfn(page) & ((1 << MAX_ORDER) - 1);
> +
> + VM_BUG_ON(page_idx & (order_size - 1));
> + VM_BUG_ON(bad_range(zone, page));
> +
> + while (order < MAX_ORDER-1) {
> + unsigned long combined_idx;
> + struct page *buddy;
> +
> + buddy = __page_find_buddy(page, page_idx, order);
> + if (!page_is_buddy(page, buddy, order))
> + break;
> +
> + /* Our buddy is free, merge with it and move up one order. */
> + list_del(&buddy->lru);
> + if (PageBuddyCapture(buddy)) {
> + buddy->buddy_free = 0;
> + __ClearPageBuddyCapture(buddy);
> + } else {
> + zone->free_area[order].nr_free--;
> + __mod_zone_page_state(zone,
> + NR_FREE_PAGES, -(1UL << order));
> + }
> + rmv_page_order(buddy);
> + combined_idx = __find_combined_index(page_idx, order);
> + page = page + (combined_idx - page_idx);
> + page_idx = combined_idx;
> + order++;
> + }
> + set_page_order(page, order);
> + __SetPageBuddyCapture(page);
> + page->buddy_free = capture_list;
> +
> + list_add(&page->lru, capture_list);
> +}
if we already have enough size page,
shoudn't we release page to buddy list?
otherwise, increase oom risk.
or, Am I misunderstanding?
> static inline void __free_one_page(struct page *page,
> struct zone *zone, unsigned int order)
> {
> @@ -433,6 +478,12 @@ static inline void __free_one_page(struct page *page,
> buddy = __page_find_buddy(page, page_idx, order);
> if (!page_is_buddy(page, buddy, order))
> break;
> + if (PageBuddyCapture(buddy)) {
> + __mod_zone_page_state(zone,
> + NR_FREE_PAGES, -(1UL << order));
> + return __capture_one_page(buddy->buddy_free,
> + page, zone, order);
> + }
shouldn't you make captured page's zonestat?
otherwise, administrator can't trouble shooting.
> /* Can pages be swapped as part of reclaim? */
> @@ -78,6 +80,12 @@ struct scan_control {
> unsigned long *scanned, int order, int mode,
> struct zone *z, struct mem_cgroup *mem_cont,
> int active);
> +
> + /* Captured page. */
> + struct page **capture;
> +
> + /* Nodemask for acceptable allocations. */
> + nodemask_t *nodemask;
> };
please more long comment.
anybody think about scan_control is reclaim purpose structure.
So, probably they think "Why is this member needed?".
> @@ -1314,8 +1360,14 @@ static unsigned long do_try_to_free_pages(struct zonelist *zonelist,
> unsigned long lru_pages = 0;
> struct zoneref *z;
> struct zone *zone;
> + struct zone *preferred_zone;
> enum zone_type high_zoneidx = gfp_zone(sc->gfp_mask);
>
> + /* This should never fail as we should be scanning a real zonelist. */
> + (void)first_zones_zonelist(zonelist, high_zoneidx, sc->nodemask,
> + &preferred_zone);
nit.
(void) is unnecessary.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists