[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20220329015230.hneciyfxoxtvfytl@master>
Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2022 01:52:30 +0000
From: Wei Yang <richard.weiyang@...il.com>
To: "Huang, Ying" <ying.huang@...el.com>
Cc: Wei Yang <richard.weiyang@...il.com>, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
mgorman@...hsingularity.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] mm/vmscan: make sure wakeup_kswapd with managed zone
On Tue, Mar 29, 2022 at 08:43:23AM +0800, Huang, Ying wrote:
[...]
>>>> --- a/mm/migrate.c
>>>> +++ b/mm/migrate.c
>>>> @@ -2046,7 +2046,7 @@ static int numamigrate_isolate_page(pg_data_t *pgdat, struct page *page)
>>>> if (!(sysctl_numa_balancing_mode & NUMA_BALANCING_MEMORY_TIERING))
>>>> return 0;
>>>> for (z = pgdat->nr_zones - 1; z >= 0; z--) {
>>>> - if (populated_zone(pgdat->node_zones + z))
>>>> + if (managed_zone(pgdat->node_zones + z))
>>>
>>>This looks good to me! Thanks! It seems that we can replace
>>>populated_zone() in migrate_balanced_pgdat() too. Right?
>>>
>>
>> Yes, you are right. I didn't spot this.
>>
>> While this patch comes from the clue of wakeup_kswapd(), I am not sure it is
>> nice to put it in this patch together.
>>
>> Which way you prefer to include this: merge the change into this one, or a
>> separate one?
>
>Either is OK for me.
>
After reading the code, I am willing to do a little simplification. Does this
look good to you?
>From 85c8a5cd708ada3e9f5b0409413407b7be1bc446 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Wei Yang <richard.weiyang@...il.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2022 09:24:36 +0800
Subject: [PATCH] mm/migrate.c: return valid zone for wakeup_kswapd from
migrate_balanced_pgdat()
To wakeup kswapd, we need to iterate pgdat->node_zones and get the
proper zone. While this work has already been done in
migrate_balanced_pgdat().
Let's return the valid zone directly instead of do the iteration again.
Signed-off-by: Wei Yang <richard.weiyang@...il.com>
---
mm/migrate.c | 21 ++++++++-------------
1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
diff --git a/mm/migrate.c b/mm/migrate.c
index 5adc55b5347c..b086bd781956 100644
--- a/mm/migrate.c
+++ b/mm/migrate.c
@@ -1973,7 +1973,7 @@ SYSCALL_DEFINE6(move_pages, pid_t, pid, unsigned long, nr_pages,
* Returns true if this is a safe migration target node for misplaced NUMA
* pages. Currently it only checks the watermarks which is crude.
*/
-static bool migrate_balanced_pgdat(struct pglist_data *pgdat,
+static struct zone *migrate_balanced_pgdat(struct pglist_data *pgdat,
unsigned long nr_migrate_pages)
{
int z;
@@ -1985,14 +1985,13 @@ static bool migrate_balanced_pgdat(struct pglist_data *pgdat,
continue;
/* Avoid waking kswapd by allocating pages_to_migrate pages. */
- if (!zone_watermark_ok(zone, 0,
+ if (zone_watermark_ok(zone, 0,
high_wmark_pages(zone) +
nr_migrate_pages,
ZONE_MOVABLE, 0))
- continue;
- return true;
+ return zone;
}
- return false;
+ return NULL;
}
static struct page *alloc_misplaced_dst_page(struct page *page,
@@ -2032,6 +2031,7 @@ static int numamigrate_isolate_page(pg_data_t *pgdat, struct page *page)
int page_lru;
int nr_pages = thp_nr_pages(page);
int order = compound_order(page);
+ struct zone *zone;
VM_BUG_ON_PAGE(order && !PageTransHuge(page), page);
@@ -2040,16 +2040,11 @@ static int numamigrate_isolate_page(pg_data_t *pgdat, struct page *page)
return 0;
/* Avoid migrating to a node that is nearly full */
- if (!migrate_balanced_pgdat(pgdat, nr_pages)) {
- int z;
-
+ if ((zone = migrate_balanced_pgdat(pgdat, nr_pages))) {
if (!(sysctl_numa_balancing_mode & NUMA_BALANCING_MEMORY_TIERING))
return 0;
- for (z = pgdat->nr_zones - 1; z >= 0; z--) {
- if (managed_zone(pgdat->node_zones + z))
- break;
- }
- wakeup_kswapd(pgdat->node_zones + z, 0, order, ZONE_MOVABLE);
+
+ wakeup_kswapd(zone, 0, order, ZONE_MOVABLE);
return 0;
}
--
2.33.1
>Best Regards,
>Huang, Ying
--
Wei Yang
Help you, Help me
Powered by blists - more mailing lists