[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190609145335.yzx4irt4mczmlvno@master>
Date: Sun, 9 Jun 2019 14:53:35 +0000
From: Wei Yang <richard.weiyang@...il.com>
To: ChenGang <cg.chen@...wei.com>
Cc: akpm@...ux-foundation.org, mhocko@...e.com, vbabka@...e.cz,
osalvador@...e.de, pavel.tatashin@...rosoft.com,
mgorman@...hsingularity.net, rppt@...ux.ibm.com,
richard.weiyang@...il.com, alexander.h.duyck@...ux.intel.com,
linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: align up min_free_kbytes to multipy of 4
On Sun, Jun 09, 2019 at 05:10:28PM +0800, ChenGang wrote:
>Usually the value of min_free_kbytes is multiply of 4,
>and in this case ,the right shift is ok.
>But if it's not, the right-shifting operation will lose the low 2 bits,
But PAGE_SHIFT is not always 12.
>and this cause kernel don't reserve enough memory.
>So it's necessary to align the value of min_free_kbytes to multiply of 4.
>For example, if min_free_kbytes is 64, then should keep 16 pages,
>but if min_free_kbytes is 65 or 66, then should keep 17 pages.
>
>Signed-off-by: ChenGang <cg.chen@...wei.com>
>---
> mm/page_alloc.c | 3 ++-
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
>diff --git a/mm/page_alloc.c b/mm/page_alloc.c
>index d66bc8a..1baeeba 100644
>--- a/mm/page_alloc.c
>+++ b/mm/page_alloc.c
>@@ -7611,7 +7611,8 @@ static void setup_per_zone_lowmem_reserve(void)
>
> static void __setup_per_zone_wmarks(void)
> {
>- unsigned long pages_min = min_free_kbytes >> (PAGE_SHIFT - 10);
>+ unsigned long pages_min =
>+ (PAGE_ALIGN(min_free_kbytes * 1024) / 1024) >> (PAGE_SHIFT - 10);
In my mind, pages_min is an estimated value. Do we need to be so precise?
> unsigned long lowmem_pages = 0;
> struct zone *zone;
> unsigned long flags;
>--
>1.8.5.6
--
Wei Yang
Help you, Help me
Powered by blists - more mailing lists