From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Qiang Liu <liuq131@chinatelecom.cn>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>,
Laura Abbott <labbott@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm/compaction: fix the total_isolated in strict mode
Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2024 16:22:48 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20241111162248.7af77e56c1ff4017d1ed4106@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20241102201621.95291-1-liuq131@chinatelecom.cn>
On Sat, 2 Nov 2024 20:16:21 +0000 Qiang Liu <liuq131@chinatelecom.cn> wrote:
> If the last cycle reads bogus compound_order() and blockpfn > end_pfn occurs,
> it is possible that total_isolated will be less than nr_scanned. In this case,
> strict mode should return 0, but the “if (strict && blockpfn < end_pfn)”
> statement cannot recognize this situation
>
> ...
>
> --- a/mm/compaction.c
> +++ b/mm/compaction.c
> @@ -699,7 +699,7 @@ static unsigned long isolate_freepages_block(struct compact_control *cc,
> * pages requested were isolated. If there were any failures, 0 is
> * returned and CMA will fail.
> */
> - if (strict && blockpfn < end_pfn)
> + if (strict && (blockpfn < end_pfn || total_isolated != nr_scanned))
> total_isolated = 0;
>
> cc->total_free_scanned += nr_scanned;
That's really old code. What userspace-visible effects might this
have? Is this from code inspection, or was some misbehaviour observed?
Thanks.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-11-12 0:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-11-02 20:16 Qiang Liu
2024-11-12 0:22 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2024-11-12 1:24 ` Baolin Wang
[not found] ` <2024111210165296529720@chinatelecom.cn>
2024-11-12 9:47 ` Baolin Wang
2024-11-14 2:58 ` Baolin Wang
2024-11-14 2:29 liuq131
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20241111162248.7af77e56c1ff4017d1ed4106@linux-foundation.org \
--to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=labbott@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=liuq131@chinatelecom.cn \
--cc=mgorman@techsingularity.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox