[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <c915a3aa-d684-f468-4b41-02bdf9b5584d@huaweicloud.com>
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2023 14:45:03 +0800
From: Kemeng Shi <shikemeng@...weicloud.com>
To: Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>
Cc: linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, baolin.wang@...ux.alibaba.com,
mgorman@...hsingularity.net, david@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 7/7] mm/compaction: factor out code to test if we
should run compaction for target order
on 8/29/2023 11:54 AM, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 26, 2023 at 11:36:17PM +0800, Kemeng Shi wrote:
>> + if (compaction_suit_allocation_order(zone,
>> + pgdat->kcompactd_max_order,
>> + highest_zoneidx, ALLOC_WMARK_MIN) ==
>> + COMPACT_CONTINUE)
>
> The indentation is confusing here. It looks like COMPACT_CONTINUE is
> an argument of compaction_suit_allocation_order(). How about:
>
> ret = compaction_suit_allocation_order(zone,
> pgdat->kcompactd_max_order,
> highest_zoneidx, ALLOC_WMARK_MIN);
> if (ret == COMPACT_CONTINUE)
>
Thanks for information, I will fix it this way in next version.
> (assuming there's a handy variable called ret)
>
> You could also distinguih it by indenting COMPACT_CONTINUE by an
> extra tab, but I think it's worth an extra variable just because this is
> such a long line>
>> + if (compaction_suit_allocation_order(zone,
>> + cc.order, zoneid, ALLOC_WMARK_MIN) !=
>> + COMPACT_CONTINUE)
>> continue;
>
> Same here.
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists