linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] mm, compaction: properly signal and act upon lock and need

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]

Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.02.1405121326080.961@chino.kir.corp.google.com>
Date:	Mon, 12 May 2014 13:28:15 -0700 (PDT)
From:	David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
To:	Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>
cc:	Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@....com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>,
	Greg Thelen <gthelen@...gle.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-mm@...ck.org, Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>,
	Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>,
	Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <b.zolnierkie@...sung.com>,
	Michal Nazarewicz <mina86@...a86.com>,
	Naoya Horiguchi <n-horiguchi@...jp.nec.com>,
	Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>,
	Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm, compaction: properly signal and act upon lock and
 need_sched() contention

On Mon, 12 May 2014, Vlastimil Babka wrote:

> diff --git a/mm/compaction.c b/mm/compaction.c
> index 83ca6f9..b34ab7c 100644
> --- a/mm/compaction.c
> +++ b/mm/compaction.c
> @@ -222,6 +222,27 @@ static bool compact_checklock_irqsave(spinlock_t *lock, unsigned long *flags,
>  	return true;
>  }
>  
> +/*
> + * Similar to compact_checklock_irqsave() (see its comment) for places where
> + * a zone lock is not concerned.
> + *
> + * Returns false when compaction should abort.
> + */

I think we should have some sufficient commentary in the code that 
describes why we do this.

> +static inline bool compact_check_resched(struct compact_control *cc)
> +{

I'm not sure that compact_check_resched() is the appropriate name.  Sure, 
it specifies what the current implementation is, but what it's really 
actually doing is determining when compaction should abort prematurely.

Something like compact_should_abort()?
--
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/