[<prev] [next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <55C874C9.4050803@suse.cz>
Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2015 11:54:17 +0200
From: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>
To: PINTU KUMAR <pintu_agarwal@...oo.com>,
"linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>
Cc: "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>,
Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@....com>,
Pintu Kumar <pintu.k@...sung.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC v3 2/2] mm, compaction: make kcompactd rely on
sysctl_extfrag_threshold
On 08/09/2015 07:21 PM, PINTU KUMAR wrote:
>>
>> -extern int fragmentation_index(struct zone *zone, unsigned int order);
>> +extern int fragmentation_index(struct zone *zone, unsigned int order,
>
>> + bool ignore_suitable);
>
> We would like to retain the original fragmentation_index as it is.
> Because in some cases people may be using it without kcompactd.
> In such cases, future kernel upgrades will suffer.
> In my opinion fragmentation_index should work just based on zones and order.
I don't understand the concern. If you pass 'false' to ignore_suitable,
you get the standard behavior. Only kcompactd uses the altered behavior.
--
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