From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-pa0-f47.google.com (mail-pa0-f47.google.com [209.85.220.47]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 941846B0035 for ; Wed, 13 Aug 2014 04:19:26 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-pa0-f47.google.com with SMTP id kx10so14310767pab.6 for ; Wed, 13 Aug 2014 01:19:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lgeamrelo02.lge.com (lgeamrelo02.lge.com. [156.147.1.126]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id uf7si978016pbc.8.2014.08.13.01.19.24 for ; Wed, 13 Aug 2014 01:19:25 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2014 17:19:21 +0900 From: Joonsoo Kim Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/8] mm/isolation: remove unstable check for isolated page Message-ID: <20140813081921.GC30451@js1304-P5Q-DELUXE> References: <1407309517-3270-1-git-send-email-iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com> <1407309517-3270-4-git-send-email-iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com> <87a97b5qi0.fsf@linux.vnet.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87a97b5qi0.fsf@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: "Aneesh Kumar K.V" Cc: Andrew Morton , "Kirill A. Shutemov" , Rik van Riel , Mel Gorman , Johannes Weiner , Minchan Kim , Yasuaki Ishimatsu , Zhang Yanfei , "Srivatsa S. Bhat" , Tang Chen , Naoya Horiguchi , Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz , Wen Congyang , Marek Szyprowski , Michal Nazarewicz , Laura Abbott , Heesub Shin , Ritesh Harjani , t.stanislaws@samsung.com, Gioh Kim , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 02:53:35PM +0530, Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote: > Joonsoo Kim writes: > > > The check '!PageBuddy(page) && page_count(page) == 0 && > > migratetype == MIGRATE_ISOLATE' would mean the page on free processing. > > Although it could go into buddy allocator within a short time, > > futher operation such as isolate_freepages_range() in CMA, called after > > test_page_isolated_in_pageblock(), could be failed due to this unstability > > since it requires that the page is on buddy. I think that removing > > this unstability is good thing. > > Is that true in case of check_pages_isolated_cb ? Does that require > PageBuddy to be true ? I think so. > > > > > And, following patch makes isolated freepage has new status matched with > > this condition and this check is the obstacle to that change. So remove > > it. > > Can you quote the patch summary in the above case ? ie, something like > > And the followiing patch "mm/....." makes isolate freepage. > Okay. "mm/isolation: change pageblock isolation logic to fix freepage counting bugs" introduce PageIsolated() and mark freepages PageIsolated() during isolation. Those pages are !PageBuddy() and page_count() == 0. Thanks. -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org