linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 10/27] mm, vmscan: Clear congestion, dirty and need for compaction on a per-node basis

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:	Thu, 16 Jun 2016 11:29:00 +0200
From:	Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>
To:	Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Linux-MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>
Cc:	Rik van Riel <riel@...riel.com>,
	Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 10/27] mm, vmscan: Clear congestion, dirty and need for
 compaction on a per-node basis

On 06/09/2016 08:04 PM, Mel Gorman wrote:
> Congested and dirty tracking of a node and whether reclaim should stall
> is still based on zone activity. This patch considers whether the kernel
> should stall based on node-based reclaim activity.

I'm a bit confused about the description vs actual code.
It appears to move some duplicated code to a related function, which is 
fine. The rest of callsites that didn't perform the clearing before 
(prepare_kswapd_sleep() and wakeup_kswapd()) might be a bit overkill, 
but won't hurt. But I don't see the part "considers whether the kernel
should stall based on node-based reclaim activity". Is something missing?

> Signed-off-by: Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>
> ---
>  mm/vmscan.c | 24 ++++++++++++------------
>  1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/vmscan.c b/mm/vmscan.c
> index dd68e3154732..e4f3e068b7a0 100644
> --- a/mm/vmscan.c
> +++ b/mm/vmscan.c
> @@ -2966,7 +2966,17 @@ static bool zone_balanced(struct zone *zone, int order, int classzone_idx)
>  {
>  	unsigned long mark = high_wmark_pages(zone);
>
> -	return zone_watermark_ok_safe(zone, order, mark, classzone_idx);
> +	if (!zone_watermark_ok_safe(zone, order, mark, classzone_idx))
> +		return false;
> +
> +	/*
> +	 * If any eligible zone is balanced then the node is not considered
> +	 * to be congested or dirty
> +	 */
> +	clear_bit(PGDAT_CONGESTED, &zone->zone_pgdat->flags);
> +	clear_bit(PGDAT_DIRTY, &zone->zone_pgdat->flags);
> +
> +	return true;
>  }
>
>  /*
> @@ -3112,13 +3122,6 @@ static int balance_pgdat(pg_data_t *pgdat, int order, int classzone_idx)
>  			if (!zone_balanced(zone, order, 0)) {
>  				classzone_idx = i;
>  				break;
> -			} else {
> -				/*
> -				 * If any eligible zone is balanced then the
> -				 * node is not considered congested or dirty.
> -				 */
> -				clear_bit(PGDAT_CONGESTED, &zone->zone_pgdat->flags);
> -				clear_bit(PGDAT_DIRTY, &zone->zone_pgdat->flags);
>  			}
>  		}
>
> @@ -3177,11 +3180,8 @@ static int balance_pgdat(pg_data_t *pgdat, int order, int classzone_idx)
>  			if (!populated_zone(zone))
>  				continue;
>
> -			if (zone_balanced(zone, sc.order, classzone_idx)) {
> -				clear_bit(PGDAT_CONGESTED, &pgdat->flags);
> -				clear_bit(PGDAT_DIRTY, &pgdat->flags);
> +			if (zone_balanced(zone, sc.order, classzone_idx))
>  				goto out;
> -			}
>  		}
>
>  		/*
>