On Sat, 2011-10-08 at 11:19 +0800, David Rientjes wrote:
> On Sat, 8 Oct 2011, Shaohua Li wrote:
>
> > has_under_min_watermark_zone is used to detect if there is GFP_ATOMIC allocation
> > failure risk. For a high end_zone, if any zone below or equal to it has min
> > matermark ok, we have no risk. But current logic is any zone has min watermark
> > not ok, then we have risk. This is wrong to me.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Shaohua Li <shaohua.li@xxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > mm/vmscan.c | 7 ++++---
> > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> >
> > Index: linux/mm/vmscan.c
> > ===================================================================
> > --- linux.orig/mm/vmscan.c 2011-09-27 15:09:29.000000000 +0800
> > +++ linux/mm/vmscan.c 2011-09-27 15:14:45.000000000 +0800
> > @@ -2463,7 +2463,7 @@ loop_again:
> >
> > for (priority = DEF_PRIORITY; priority >= 0; priority--) {
> > unsigned long lru_pages = 0;
> > - int has_under_min_watermark_zone = 0;
> > + int has_under_min_watermark_zone = 1;
>
> bool
>
> >
> > /* The swap token gets in the way of swapout... */
> > if (!priority)
> > @@ -2594,9 +2594,10 @@ loop_again:
> > * means that we have a GFP_ATOMIC allocation
> > * failure risk. Hurry up!
> > */
> > - if (!zone_watermark_ok_safe(zone, order,
> > + if (has_under_min_watermark_zone &&
> > + zone_watermark_ok_safe(zone, order,
> > min_wmark_pages(zone), end_zone, 0))
> > - has_under_min_watermark_zone = 1;
> > + has_under_min_watermark_zone = 0;
> > } else {
> > /*
> > * If a zone reaches its high watermark,
>
> Ignore checking the min watermark for a moment and consider if all zones
> are above the high watermark (a situation where kswapd does not need to
> do aggressive reclaim), then has_under_min_watermark_zone doesn't get
> cleared and never actually stalls on congestion_wait(). Notice this is
> congestion_wait() and not wait_iff_congested(), so the clearing of
> ZONE_CONGESTED doesn't prevent this.
if all zones are above the high watermark, we will have i < 0 when
detecting the highest imbalanced zone, and the whole loop will end
without run into congestion_wait().
or I can add a clearing has_under_min_watermark_zone in the else block
to be safe.
--
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>