[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <57397271.50504@suse.cz>
Date: Mon, 16 May 2016 09:10:41 +0200
From: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
Cc: linux-mm@...ck.org, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@....com>,
Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.sakura.ne.jp>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC 08/13] mm, compaction: simplify contended compaction
handling
On 05/13/2016 03:09 PM, Michal Hocko wrote:
>> >@@ -1564,14 +1564,11 @@ static enum compact_result compact_zone(struct zone *zone, struct compact_contro
>> > trace_mm_compaction_end(start_pfn, cc->migrate_pfn,
>> > cc->free_pfn, end_pfn, sync, ret);
>> >
>> >- if (ret == COMPACT_CONTENDED)
>> >- ret = COMPACT_PARTIAL;
>> >-
>> > return ret;
>> > }
> This took me a while to grasp but then I realized this is correct
> because we shouldn't pretend progress when there was none in fact,
> especially when __alloc_pages_direct_compact basically replaced this
> "fake" COMPACT_PARTIAL by COMPACT_CONTENDED anyway.
Yes. Actually COMPACT_CONTENDED compact_result used to be just for the
tracepoint, and __alloc_pages_direct_compact used another function
parameter to signal contention. You changed it with the oom rework so
COMPACT_CONTENDED result value was used, so this hunk just makes sure
it's still reported correctly.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists