linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 03/10] mm: vmscan: Flatten kswapd priority loop

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 19 Mar 2013 11:01:37 +0000
From:	Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>
To:	Simon Jeons <simon.jeons@...il.com>
Cc:	Linux-MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>, Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.cz>,
	Valdis Kletnieks <Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu>,
	Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
	Zlatko Calusic <zcalusic@...sync.net>,
	Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
	dormando <dormando@...ia.net>,
	Satoru Moriya <satoru.moriya@....com>,
	Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.cz>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 03/10] mm: vmscan: Flatten kswapd priority loop

On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 06:26:43PM +0800, Simon Jeons wrote:
> >>>-		if (sc.nr_reclaimed >= SWAP_CLUSTER_MAX)
> >>>-			break;
> >>>-	} while (--sc.priority >= 0);
> >>>+		if (order && sc.nr_reclaimed >= 2UL << order)
> >>>+			order = sc.order = 0;
> >>If order == 0 is meet, should we do defrag for it?
> >>
> >Compaction is unnecessary for order-0.
> >
> 
> I mean since order && sc.reclaimed >= 2UL << order, it is reclaimed
> for high order allocation, if order == 0 is meet, should we do
> defrag for it?
> 

I don't get this question at all. We do not defrag via compaction for
order-0 allocation requests because it makes no sense.

-- 
Mel Gorman
SUSE Labs
--
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/