On Fri, 9 Sep 2022 10:16:53 +0800 Liu Shixin <liushixin2@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Since user who read THP_ZERO_PAGE_ALLOC may be more concerned about the > huge zero pages that are really allocated using for thp and can indicated > the times of calling huge_zero_page_shrinker. It is misleading to increase > twice if two threads call get_huge_zero_page concurrently. Don't increase > the value if the huge page is not really used. > I cant say I really understand the point about huge_zero_page_shrinker(), so I propose this changelog: : A user who reads THP_ZERO_PAGE_ALLOC may be more concerned about the huge : zero pages that are really allocated for thp. It is misleading to : increase THP_ZERO_PAGE_ALLOC twice if two threads call get_huge_zero_page : concurrently. Don't increase the value if the huge page is not really : used. The patch makes sense to me. What do others think?
