On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 01:37:10PM +0200, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 13, 2011 at 01:37:43AM +0900, Minchan Kim wrote:
> > I saw the following accouting of compaction during test of the series.
> >
> > compact_blocks_moved 251
> > compact_pages_moved 44
> >
> > It's very awkward to me although it's possbile because it means we try to compact 251 blocks
> > but it just migrated 44 pages. As further investigation, I found isolate_migratepages doesn't
> > isolate any pages but it returns ISOLATE_SUCCESS and then, it just increases compact_blocks_moved
> > but doesn't increased compact_pages_moved.
> >
> > This patch makes accouting of compaction works only in case of success of isolation.
> >
> > CC: Mel Gorman <mgorman@xxxxxxx>
> > CC: Johannes Weiner <jweiner@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > CC: Rik van Riel <riel@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > Signed-off-by: Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@xxxxxxxxx>
>
> Acked-by: Johannes Weiner <jweiner@xxxxxxxxxx>
Thanks, Hannes.
>
> It's a teensy-bit awkward that isolate_migratepages() can return
> success without actually isolating any new pages, just because there
> are still some pages left from a previous run (cc->nr_migratepages is
> maintained across isolation calls).
If migrate_pages fails, we reset cc->nr_migratepages to zero in compact_zone.
Am I missing something?
>
> Maybe isolate_migratepages() should just return an error if compaction
> should really be aborted and 0 otherwise, and have compact_zone()
> always check for cc->nr_migratepages itself?
>
> if (isolate_migratepages(zone, cc) < 0) {
> ret = COMPACT_PARTIAL;
> goto out;
> }
>
> if (!cc->nr_migratepages)
> continue;
>
> ...
>
> Just a nit-pick, though. If you don't agree, just leave it as is.
--
Kind regards,
Minchan Kim
--
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/ .
Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>