-----邮件原件----- 发件人: Rafael Aquini <aquini@xxxxxxxxxx> 发送时间: 2021年4月30日 3:46 收件人: Chu,Kaiping <chukaiping@xxxxxxxxx> 抄送: mcgrof@xxxxxxxxxx; keescook@xxxxxxxxxxxx; yzaikin@xxxxxxxxxx; akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; vbabka@xxxxxxx; nigupta@xxxxxxxxxx; bhe@xxxxxxxxxx; khalid.aziz@xxxxxxxxxx; iamjoonsoo.kim@xxxxxxx; mateusznosek0@xxxxxxxxx; sh_def@xxxxxxx; linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-fsdevel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-mm@xxxxxxxxx 主题: Re: 答复: [PATCH v3] mm/compaction:let proactive compaction order configurable On Wed, Apr 28, 2021 at 01:17:40AM +0000, Chu,Kaiping wrote: > Please see my answer inline. > > -----邮件原件----- > 发件人: Rafael Aquini <aquini@xxxxxxxxxx> > 发送时间: 2021年4月26日 9:31 > 收件人: Chu,Kaiping <chukaiping@xxxxxxxxx> > 抄送: mcgrof@xxxxxxxxxx; keescook@xxxxxxxxxxxx; yzaikin@xxxxxxxxxx; > akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; vbabka@xxxxxxx; nigupta@xxxxxxxxxx; > bhe@xxxxxxxxxx; khalid.aziz@xxxxxxxxxx; iamjoonsoo.kim@xxxxxxx; > mateusznosek0@xxxxxxxxx; sh_def@xxxxxxx; linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; > linux-fsdevel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-mm@xxxxxxxxx > 主题: Re: [PATCH v3] mm/compaction:let proactive compaction order > configurable > > On Sun, Apr 25, 2021 at 09:21:02AM +0800, chukaiping wrote: > > Currently the proactive compaction order is fixed to > > COMPACTION_HPAGE_ORDER(9), it's OK in most machines with lots of > > normal 4KB memory, but it's too high for the machines with small > > normal memory, for example the machines with most memory configured > > as 1GB hugetlbfs huge pages. In these machines the max order of free > > pages is often below 9, and it's always below 9 even with hard > > compaction. This will lead to proactive compaction be triggered very > > frequently. In these machines we only care about order of 3 or 4. > > This patch export the oder to proc and let it configurable by user, > > and the default value is still COMPACTION_HPAGE_ORDER. > > > > Signed-off-by: chukaiping <chukaiping@xxxxxxxxx> > > Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@xxxxxxxxx> > > Two minor nits on the commit log message: > * there seems to be a whitespage missing in your short log: > "... mm/compaction:let ..." > --> I will fix it in next patch. > > * has the path really been reported by a test robot? > --> Yes. There is a compile error in v1, I fixed it in v2. > > So, no... the test robot should not be listed as Reported-by. I did it as below suggestion in the build error notification email sent by kernel test robot. " If you fix the issue, kindly add following tag as appropriate Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@xxxxxxxxx>"
