[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200205124329.GE26758@MiWiFi-R3L-srv>
Date: Wed, 5 Feb 2020 20:43:29 +0800
From: Baoquan He <bhe@...hat.com>
To: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-ia64@...r.kernel.org,
linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, linux-s390@...r.kernel.org,
linux-sh@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Oscar Salvador <osalvador@...e.de>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>,
Pavel Tatashin <pasha.tatashin@...een.com>,
Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
Wei Yang <richardw.yang@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 08/10] mm/memory_hotplug: Don't check for "all holes"
in shrink_zone_span()
On 02/04/20 at 03:42pm, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> On 04.02.20 15:25, Baoquan He wrote:
> > On 10/06/19 at 10:56am, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> >> If we have holes, the holes will automatically get detected and removed
> >> once we remove the next bigger/smaller section. The extra checks can
> >> go.
> >>
> >> Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
> >> Cc: Oscar Salvador <osalvador@...e.de>
> >> Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>
> >> Cc: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
> >> Cc: Pavel Tatashin <pasha.tatashin@...een.com>
> >> Cc: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
> >> Cc: Wei Yang <richardw.yang@...ux.intel.com>
> >> Signed-off-by: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
> >> ---
> >> mm/memory_hotplug.c | 34 +++++++---------------------------
> >> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 27 deletions(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/mm/memory_hotplug.c b/mm/memory_hotplug.c
> >> index f294918f7211..8dafa1ba8d9f 100644
> >> --- a/mm/memory_hotplug.c
> >> +++ b/mm/memory_hotplug.c
> >> @@ -393,6 +393,9 @@ static void shrink_zone_span(struct zone *zone, unsigned long start_pfn,
> >> if (pfn) {
> >> zone->zone_start_pfn = pfn;
> >> zone->spanned_pages = zone_end_pfn - pfn;
> >> + } else {
> >> + zone->zone_start_pfn = 0;
> >> + zone->spanned_pages = 0;
> >> }
> >> } else if (zone_end_pfn == end_pfn) {
> >> /*
> >> @@ -405,34 +408,11 @@ static void shrink_zone_span(struct zone *zone, unsigned long start_pfn,
> >> start_pfn);
> >> if (pfn)
> >> zone->spanned_pages = pfn - zone_start_pfn + 1;
> >> + else {
> >> + zone->zone_start_pfn = 0;
> >> + zone->spanned_pages = 0;
> >
> > Thinking in which case (zone_start_pfn != start_pfn) and it comes here.
>
> Could only happen in case the zone_start_pfn would have been "out of the
> zone already". If you ask me: unlikely :)
Yeah, I also think it's unlikely to come here.
The 'if (zone_start_pfn == start_pfn)' checking also covers the case
(zone_start_pfn == start_pfn && zone_end_pfn == end_pfn). So this
zone_start_pfn/spanned_pages resetting can be removed to avoid
confusion.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists