[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20240918045836.10825-1-gxxa03070307@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2024 12:58:36 +0800
From: Xiang Gao <gxxa03070307@...il.com>
To: akpm@...ux-foundation.org
Cc: linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
gaoxiang17 <gaoxiang17@...omi.com>
Subject: [PATCH] mm/page_alloc: Add some comments for specific scenarios to make it easier to understand why unmovable and reclaimable allocations can steal from moveable pageblocks by default.
From: gaoxiang17 <gaoxiang17@...omi.com>
Signed-off-by: gaoxiang17 <gaoxiang17@...omi.com>
---
mm/page_alloc.c | 7 +++++++
1 file changed, 7 insertions(+)
diff --git a/mm/page_alloc.c b/mm/page_alloc.c
index 91ace8ca97e2..cc8a7a0772cb 100644
--- a/mm/page_alloc.c
+++ b/mm/page_alloc.c
@@ -1818,6 +1818,13 @@ static bool can_steal_fallback(unsigned int order, int start_mt)
if (order >= pageblock_order)
return true;
+ /*
+ * The reasons why unmovable and reclaimable allocations can steal from
+ * moveable pageblocks by default aside from the above comments, a different
+ * and better understood scenario is: System initializations are all movable
+ * pageblocks. If you want to alloc unmovable and reclaimable pages,
+ * you have to steal from moveable pageblocks or it may fail.
+ */
if (order >= pageblock_order / 2 ||
start_mt == MIGRATE_RECLAIMABLE ||
start_mt == MIGRATE_UNMOVABLE ||
--
2.34.1
Powered by blists - more mailing lists