[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20230215180316.75431-1-sj@kernel.org>
Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2023 18:03:16 +0000
From: SeongJae Park <sj@...nel.org>
To: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
Cc: SeongJae Park <sj@...nel.org>, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
osalvador@...e.de, linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm/memory_hotplug: return zero from do_migrate_range() for only success
On Wed, 15 Feb 2023 14:16:05 +0100 David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com> wrote:
> On 14.02.23 23:32, SeongJae Park wrote:
> > do_migrate_range() returns migrate_pages() return value, which zero
> > means perfect success, in usual cases. If all pages are failed to be
> > isolated, however, it returns isolate_{lru,movalbe}_page() return
> > values, or zero if all pfn were invalid, were hugetlb or hwpoisoned. So
> > do_migrate_range() returning zero means either perfect success, or
> > special cases of isolation total failure.
> >
> > Actually, the return value is not checked by any caller, so it might be
> > better to simply make it a void function. However, there is a TODO for
> > checking the return value.
>
> I'd prefer to not add more dead code ;) Let's not return an error instead.
Makes sense, I will send next spin soon.
>
> It's still unclear which kind of fatal migration issues we actually care
> about and how to really detect them.
What do you think about treating the isolation/migration rate limit
(migrate_rs) hit in do_migrate_range() as fatal? It warns for the event
already, so definitely a bad sign.
If that's not that bad enough to be treated as fatal, I think we could have yet
another rate limit to be considered fatal.
Thanks,
SJ
>
> --
> Thanks,
>
> David / dhildenb
Powered by blists - more mailing lists