On Tue 19-07-16 12:08:30, Andrew Morton wrote: > From: zhong jiang <zhongjiang@xxxxxxxxxx> > Subject: mm/page_owner: align with pageblock_nr pages > > When pfn_valid(pfn) return false, pfn should be align with > pageblock_nr_pages other than MAX_ORDER_NR_PAGES in init_pages_in_zone, > because the skipped 2M may be valid pfn, as a result, early allocated > count will not be accurate. > > Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1468938136-24228-1-git-send-email-zhongjiang@xxxxxxxxxx > Signed-off-by: zhong jiang <zhongjiang@xxxxxxxxxx> > Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@xxxxxxxxxx> > Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> So I can still see this in the mmomt tree. We have discussed that briefly and I am not sure this is an improvement or just replaces a confused code by a differently confused one. See http://lkml.kernel.org/r/8a4e54f2-23ed-f20f-c0da-e9412f52b606@xxxxxxx What we haven't heard of yet is whether this patch actually fixes any real problem. If not I would prefer not to make this kind of changes and rather rework the function and co. to work with all the supported memory models with different possible holes. > --- > > mm/page_owner.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff -puN mm/page_owner.c~mm-page_owner-align-with-pageblock_nr-pages mm/page_owner.c > --- a/mm/page_owner.c~mm-page_owner-align-with-pageblock_nr-pages > +++ a/mm/page_owner.c > @@ -417,7 +417,7 @@ static void init_pages_in_zone(pg_data_t > */ > for (; pfn < end_pfn; ) { > if (!pfn_valid(pfn)) { > - pfn = ALIGN(pfn + 1, MAX_ORDER_NR_PAGES); > + pfn = ALIGN(pfn + 1, pageblock_nr_pages); > continue; > } > > _ > > Patches currently in -mm which might be from zhongjiang@xxxxxxxxxx are > > mm-update-the-comment-in-__isolate_free_page.patch > mm-page_owner-align-with-pageblock_nr-pages.patch -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>