Hi Kame, On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 1:58 PM, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > How about this ? > == > From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Current memory cgroup's code tends to assume page_size == PAGE_SIZE > and arrangement for THP is not enough yet. > > This is one of fixes for supporing THP. This adds > mem_cgroup_check_margin() and checks whether there are required amount of > free resource after memory reclaim. By this, THP page allocation > can know whether it really succeeded or not and avoid infinite-loop > and hangup. > > Total fixes for do_charge()/reclaim memory will follow this patch. If this patch is only related to THP, I think patch order isn't good. Before applying [2/4], huge page allocation will retry without reclaiming and loop forever by below part. @@ -1854,9 +1858,6 @@ static int __mem_cgroup_do_charge(struct } else mem_over_limit = mem_cgroup_from_res_counter(fail_res, res); - if (csize > PAGE_SIZE) /* change csize and retry */ - return CHARGE_RETRY; - if (!(gfp_mask & __GFP_WAIT)) return CHARGE_WOULDBLOCK; Am I missing something? -- Kind regards, Minchan Kim -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxx For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Fight unfair telecom policy in Canada: sign http://dissolvethecrtc.ca/ Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>