From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 485BFC48260 for ; Sat, 17 Feb 2024 02:55:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id AEE706B008C; Fri, 16 Feb 2024 21:55:19 -0500 (EST) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id A9D2E6B0092; Fri, 16 Feb 2024 21:55:19 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 9647C6B0093; Fri, 16 Feb 2024 21:55:19 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from relay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0016.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.16]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 87A026B008C for ; Fri, 16 Feb 2024 21:55:19 -0500 (EST) Received: from smtpin14.hostedemail.com (a10.router.float.18 [10.200.18.1]) by unirelay08.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 50A94140139 for ; Sat, 17 Feb 2024 02:55:19 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 81799779558.14.5363CB1 Received: from szxga05-in.huawei.com (szxga05-in.huawei.com [45.249.212.191]) by imf29.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 562BA120002 for ; Sat, 17 Feb 2024 02:55:15 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: imf29.hostedemail.com; dkim=none; spf=pass (imf29.hostedemail.com: domain of wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com designates 45.249.212.191 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com; dmarc=pass (policy=quarantine) header.from=huawei.com ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hostedemail.com; s=arc-20220608; t=1708138517; h=from:from:sender:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=EhEURIHRDIaMFktC07Z5k5qcNqnmLlZRpLio2ibWC0M=; b=4YcwOvZdQU0gokOFHugerWXocL5pAJaxpprWKbKCVEMOu04kVNQRsi2mlVg2BfQP/J9hN+ +vxNDqyjMgYHx5EySruIGU1pZ7dpEwLo1KHPMPCbhyJhrl1X3o81EQlVe4rIhabsp4hByK iKfChsX/Lo4A6g1McbHH+44/c9SzH4w= ARC-Seal: i=1; s=arc-20220608; d=hostedemail.com; t=1708138517; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=QM0wphmETOL+yPycCbcsS4ImlCHPX7buSn8yyplVO+3/W2sTXnfsVs5fKY4U1yH0Cjnnvp sWnx6MM9nTq7O36bHite+DElm95Hms0vnovyr64QF0DiEcA/Is2a9hED8cs74hzVioS9Zq afuWIaoYPPcUPTqtG5hxNfgbHuIHYi0= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; imf29.hostedemail.com; dkim=none; spf=pass (imf29.hostedemail.com: domain of wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com designates 45.249.212.191 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com; dmarc=pass (policy=quarantine) header.from=huawei.com Received: from mail.maildlp.com (unknown [172.19.162.112]) by szxga05-in.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTP id 4TcCw04llsz1FKc9; Sat, 17 Feb 2024 10:50:24 +0800 (CST) Received: from dggpemm100001.china.huawei.com (unknown [7.185.36.93]) by mail.maildlp.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B56AA14038F; Sat, 17 Feb 2024 10:55:11 +0800 (CST) Received: from [10.174.177.243] (10.174.177.243) by dggpemm100001.china.huawei.com (7.185.36.93) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.2507.35; Sat, 17 Feb 2024 10:55:11 +0800 Message-ID: Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2024 10:55:10 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: compaction: early termination in compact_nodes() To: David Hildenbrand , Andrew Morton CC: References: <20240207095841.1648144-1-wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com> <20240208022508.1771534-1-wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com> <20240208131440.e30a650505fac4068ab75ee8@linux-foundation.org> Content-Language: en-US From: Kefeng Wang In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Originating-IP: [10.174.177.243] X-ClientProxiedBy: dggems704-chm.china.huawei.com (10.3.19.181) To dggpemm100001.china.huawei.com (7.185.36.93) X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 562BA120002 X-Rspam-User: X-Stat-Signature: ak1gdpo8ggf5wx4z769qh8ced7pqaidp X-Rspamd-Server: rspam03 X-HE-Tag: 1708138515-624559 X-HE-Meta: U2FsdGVkX1+FtD4IucehXlh903Jeo88eJYssHs7O4JSbQBr8MmlcX5j7N0EWVRsf651H1g62/WD0eIX4ZwuWckU66NGS2ufKKod8GTYOC9kwdf4w9B71+I0kXlCQeJW+PobDxtw6nVoCC94ZAzOhdEjBSIDdI0djKfi/stMHkruU305F7g3ri+BkeLB/Nf7qK/vXD6unR4x1NX3/X9UZL5lorq7d9e4l7CB76pkP8zbWWVaVNheQRbyoqLUywjGNexJdStIes9HQUTbpVKoPvVDOmgylUpK0hQ+KbsMUirb9bR2MAuNWpF1I2iUsI+4acdmgQ2ZCKtv9TgmN53tK5bCaP2s+ta5BWa8mc0tUWGD7RSVBCcX+ZS4XLDQ9etrXtDUEdoxPB6NpfYgzfiKMk2LXYAdG0sEGxkZQbweufe+93v+SXn6UmtiT40itY5XogosjTd0dp3I8VaZ3oXie7idOeNBGWpqzSnhMyQhvuFFh21J3w+TneBCf//sZlNPh+7uKlYZGph+aGODlWvYIL4cVsCuIkBxiskfYifSEq6SEg1o3DKx8qNhu+hhc4XpJpdwPyRnTwMPqSroGeIBcnRlNUSr1TbMS0hNCeWZstBAiCETGUC4DqEM5SxJ1kA3OWJJJIQxBpn2RTBeEf+5kVSqBJDbzi0ExwRtAZQUF9LCpQIl3JbT8ln1LV/7hqj//QDZ0dxB5APEQSWMp7QbWgZ7ioMj2t58wrifH3cMmYlOA7TNe6x5tHoHWTq3dG3QdQZS2mmBEjZYqKsYyBHEy2ZMEXb8Da/Il7CJToPH2ILDIkfeUbcybIOVc4o2DXrFera6DEG2Igtw6/+rPYE01JdtYjIHdBx0CFQYSzA4492VIXnfAcI5JwXMH+Kkawhvhsid2aRdbsEo= X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: On 2024/2/12 22:22, David Hildenbrand wrote: > On 08.02.24 22:14, Andrew Morton wrote: >> On Thu, 8 Feb 2024 10:25:08 +0800 Kefeng Wang >> wrote: >> >>> No need to continue try compact memory if pending fatal signal, >>> allow loop termination earlier in compact_nodes(). >> >> Seems sensible, but...  why?  Is there some problem which we can >> demonstrate with the existing code?  In other words, does this change >> provide any observable benefit under any circumstances? > > I'd also be curious why the existing fatal_signal_pending() calls are > insufficient. The existing fatal_signal_pending() does make compact_zone() breakout of the while loop, but it still enter the next zone/next nid, and some unnecessary functions(eg, lru_add_drain) called, no observable benefit from test, it is just found from code inspection when refactor compact_node().