[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200928075820.GA4082@linux>
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2020 09:58:24 +0200
From: Oscar Salvador <osalvador@...e.de>
To: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-hyperv@...r.kernel.org, xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org,
linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Alexander Duyck <alexander.h.duyck@...ux.intel.com>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
Wei Yang <richard.weiyang@...ux.alibaba.com>,
Mike Rapoport <rppt@...nel.org>,
"K. Y. Srinivasan" <kys@...rosoft.com>,
Haiyang Zhang <haiyangz@...rosoft.com>,
Stephen Hemminger <sthemmin@...rosoft.com>,
Wei Liu <wei.liu@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 4/4] mm/page_alloc: place pages to tail in
__free_pages_core()
On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 08:34:11PM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> @@ -1523,7 +1524,13 @@ void __free_pages_core(struct page *page, unsigned int order)
>
> atomic_long_add(nr_pages, &page_zone(page)->managed_pages);
> set_page_refcounted(page);
> - __free_pages(page, order);
> +
> + /*
> + * Bypass PCP and place fresh pages right to the tail, primarily
> + * relevant for memory onlining.
> + */
> + page_ref_dec(page);
> + __free_pages_ok(page, order, FOP_TO_TAIL);
Sorry, I must be missing something obvious here, but I am a bit confused here.
I get the part of placing them at the tail so rmqueue_bulk() won't
find them, but I do not get why we decrement page's refcount.
IIUC, its refcount will be 0, but why do we want to do that?
Another thing a bit unrelated... we mess three times with page's refcount
(two before this patch).
Why do we have this dance in place?
Thanks
--
Oscar Salvador
SUSE L3
Powered by blists - more mailing lists