* [PATCH] mm: fix shrink nr.unqueued_dirty counter issue
@ 2024-01-12 1:23 Zhiguo Jiang
2024-09-25 20:51 ` Andrew Morton
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Zhiguo Jiang @ 2024-01-12 1:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Andrew Morton, linux-mm, linux-kernel; +Cc: opensource.kernel, Zhiguo Jiang
It is needed to ensure sc->nr.unqueued_dirty > 0, which can avoid to
set PGDAT_DIRTY flag when sc->nr.unqueued_dirty and sc->nr.file_taken
are both zero at the same time.
Signed-off-by: Zhiguo Jiang <justinjiang@vivo.com>
---
mm/vmscan.c | 3 ++-
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
mode change 100644 => 100755 mm/vmscan.c
diff --git a/mm/vmscan.c b/mm/vmscan.c
index 91e7d334a7ca..7c0cd7ecdfab
--- a/mm/vmscan.c
+++ b/mm/vmscan.c
@@ -5957,7 +5957,8 @@ static void shrink_node(pg_data_t *pgdat, struct scan_control *sc)
set_bit(PGDAT_WRITEBACK, &pgdat->flags);
/* Allow kswapd to start writing pages during reclaim.*/
- if (sc->nr.unqueued_dirty == sc->nr.file_taken)
+ if (sc->nr.unqueued_dirty &&
+ sc->nr.unqueued_dirty == sc->nr.file_taken)
set_bit(PGDAT_DIRTY, &pgdat->flags);
/*
--
2.39.0
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] mm: fix shrink nr.unqueued_dirty counter issue
2024-01-12 1:23 [PATCH] mm: fix shrink nr.unqueued_dirty counter issue Zhiguo Jiang
@ 2024-09-25 20:51 ` Andrew Morton
0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Andrew Morton @ 2024-09-25 20:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Zhiguo Jiang; +Cc: linux-mm, linux-kernel, opensource.kernel
On Fri, 12 Jan 2024 09:23:52 +0800 Zhiguo Jiang <justinjiang@vivo.com> wrote:
> It is needed to ensure sc->nr.unqueued_dirty > 0, which can avoid to
> set PGDAT_DIRTY flag when sc->nr.unqueued_dirty and sc->nr.file_taken
> are both zero at the same time.
>
> ...
>
> --- a/mm/vmscan.c
> +++ b/mm/vmscan.c
> @@ -5957,7 +5957,8 @@ static void shrink_node(pg_data_t *pgdat, struct scan_control *sc)
> set_bit(PGDAT_WRITEBACK, &pgdat->flags);
>
> /* Allow kswapd to start writing pages during reclaim.*/
> - if (sc->nr.unqueued_dirty == sc->nr.file_taken)
> + if (sc->nr.unqueued_dirty &&
> + sc->nr.unqueued_dirty == sc->nr.file_taken)
> set_bit(PGDAT_DIRTY, &pgdat->flags);
>
Seems sensible. Was this discovered by code inspection, or is there
some observable runtime effect? If the latter, can you please describe
that effect?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* [PATCH] mm: fix shrink nr.unqueued_dirty counter issue
@ 2023-12-08 11:29 Zhiguo Jiang
0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Zhiguo Jiang @ 2023-12-08 11:29 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Andrew Morton, linux-mm, linux-kernel; +Cc: opensource.kernel, Zhiguo Jiang
It is needed to ensure sc->nr.unqueued_dirty > 0, which can avoid to
set PGDAT_DIRTY flag when sc->nr.unqueued_dirty and sc->nr.file_taken
are both zero at the same time.
Signed-off-by: Zhiguo Jiang <justinjiang@vivo.com>
---
mm/vmscan.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
mode change 100644 => 100755 mm/vmscan.c
diff --git a/mm/vmscan.c b/mm/vmscan.c
index 4e3b835c6b4a..12680c392bb0
--- a/mm/vmscan.c
+++ b/mm/vmscan.c
@@ -5908,7 +5908,7 @@ static void shrink_node(pg_data_t *pgdat, struct scan_control *sc)
set_bit(PGDAT_WRITEBACK, &pgdat->flags);
/* Allow kswapd to start writing pages during reclaim.*/
- if (sc->nr.unqueued_dirty == sc->nr.file_taken)
+ if (sc->nr.unqueued_dirty && sc->nr.unqueued_dirty == sc->nr.file_taken)
set_bit(PGDAT_DIRTY, &pgdat->flags);
/*
--
2.39.0
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2024-09-25 20:51 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2024-01-12 1:23 [PATCH] mm: fix shrink nr.unqueued_dirty counter issue Zhiguo Jiang
2024-09-25 20:51 ` Andrew Morton
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2023-12-08 11:29 Zhiguo Jiang
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox