On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 12:23:13PM +0530, Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I was looking at this w.r.t a recent patch series and wondering whether
> the usage of alloc_contig_page is correct there. We do
>
>
> static int __alloc_gigantic_page(unsigned long start_pfn,
> unsigned long nr_pages)
> {
> unsigned long end_pfn = start_pfn + nr_pages;
> return alloc_contig_range(start_pfn, end_pfn, MIGRATE_MOVABLE);
> }
>
>
> That implies, if we fail in certain case we will mark the page block
> migrate type MIGRATE_MOVABLE . Do we want to do that in all case ?
> What if the start_pfn was convering a page block of MIGRATE_CMA type ?
> Should we skip pageblock with MIGRATE_CMA type when trying to allocate
> gigantic huge page ?
I have not read the code so deep. I will study it when I have time.
Btw: Do we really need the free_contig_range() run like this?
free page one by one? I guess we can optimize it to free pages at the unit
of the page order.
Thanks
Huang Shijie
--
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>