[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20160926162025.21555-3-vbabka@suse.cz>
Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2016 18:20:23 +0200
From: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Arkadiusz Miskiewicz <a.miskiewicz@...il.com>,
Ralf-Peter Rohbeck <Ralf-Peter.Rohbeck@...ntum.com>,
Olaf Hering <olaf@...fle.de>, Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>,
Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@....com>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
Hillf Danton <hillf.zj@...baba-inc.com>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>
Subject: [PATCH 2/4] mm, page_alloc: pull no_progress_loops update to should_reclaim_retry()
The should_reclaim_retry() makes decisions based on no_progress_loops, so it
makes sense to also update the counter there. It will be also consistent with
should_compact_retry() and compaction_retries. No functional change.
[hillf.zj@...baba-inc.com: fix missing pointer dereferences]
Signed-off-by: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>
Acked-by: Hillf Danton <hillf.zj@...baba-inc.com>
Acked-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>
Cc: Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>
Cc: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@....com>
Cc: David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
Cc: Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>
---
mm/page_alloc.c | 28 ++++++++++++++--------------
1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
diff --git a/mm/page_alloc.c b/mm/page_alloc.c
index 0fd29731ab35..8ed4f506ae0b 100644
--- a/mm/page_alloc.c
+++ b/mm/page_alloc.c
@@ -3404,16 +3404,26 @@ bool gfp_pfmemalloc_allowed(gfp_t gfp_mask)
static inline bool
should_reclaim_retry(gfp_t gfp_mask, unsigned order,
struct alloc_context *ac, int alloc_flags,
- bool did_some_progress, int no_progress_loops)
+ bool did_some_progress, int *no_progress_loops)
{
struct zone *zone;
struct zoneref *z;
/*
+ * Costly allocations might have made a progress but this doesn't mean
+ * their order will become available due to high fragmentation so
+ * always increment the no progress counter for them
+ */
+ if (did_some_progress && order <= PAGE_ALLOC_COSTLY_ORDER)
+ *no_progress_loops = 0;
+ else
+ (*no_progress_loops)++;
+
+ /*
* Make sure we converge to OOM if we cannot make any progress
* several times in the row.
*/
- if (no_progress_loops > MAX_RECLAIM_RETRIES)
+ if (*no_progress_loops > MAX_RECLAIM_RETRIES)
return false;
/*
@@ -3428,7 +3438,7 @@ should_reclaim_retry(gfp_t gfp_mask, unsigned order,
unsigned long reclaimable;
available = reclaimable = zone_reclaimable_pages(zone);
- available -= DIV_ROUND_UP(no_progress_loops * available,
+ available -= DIV_ROUND_UP((*no_progress_loops) * available,
MAX_RECLAIM_RETRIES);
available += zone_page_state_snapshot(zone, NR_FREE_PAGES);
@@ -3650,18 +3660,8 @@ __alloc_pages_slowpath(gfp_t gfp_mask, unsigned int order,
if (order > PAGE_ALLOC_COSTLY_ORDER && !(gfp_mask & __GFP_REPEAT))
goto nopage;
- /*
- * Costly allocations might have made a progress but this doesn't mean
- * their order will become available due to high fragmentation so
- * always increment the no progress counter for them
- */
- if (did_some_progress && order <= PAGE_ALLOC_COSTLY_ORDER)
- no_progress_loops = 0;
- else
- no_progress_loops++;
-
if (should_reclaim_retry(gfp_mask, order, ac, alloc_flags,
- did_some_progress > 0, no_progress_loops))
+ did_some_progress > 0, &no_progress_loops))
goto retry;
/*
--
2.10.0
Powered by blists - more mailing lists