[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <570B843C.8050608@suse.cz>
Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2016 13:02:20 +0200
From: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.SAKURA.ne.jp>,
Joonsoo Kim <js1304@...il.com>,
Hillf Danton <hillf.zj@...baba-inc.com>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 05/11] mm, compaction: distinguish COMPACT_DEFERRED from
COMPACT_SKIPPED
On 04/05/2016 01:25 PM, Michal Hocko wrote:
> From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>
>
> try_to_compact_pages can currently return COMPACT_SKIPPED even when the
> compaction is defered for some zone just because zone DMA is skipped
> in 99% of cases due to watermark checks. This makes COMPACT_DEFERRED
> basically unusable for the page allocator as a feedback mechanism.
>
> Make sure we distinguish those two states properly and switch their
> ordering in the enum. This would mean that the COMPACT_SKIPPED will be
> returned only when all eligible zones are skipped.
>
> This shouldn't introduce any functional change.
Hmm, really? __alloc_pages_direct_compact() does distinguish
COMPACT_DEFERRED, and sets *deferred compaction, so ultimately this is
some change for THP allocations?
Also there's no mention of COMPACT_INACTIVE in the changelog (which
indeed isn't functional change, but might surprise somebody).
> Signed-off-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>
Patch itself is OK.
Acked-by: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists