Hi Andrew,
Can you please take this fixlet? Thanks.
Fix imprecise comments.
Signed-off-by: Yu Zhao <yuzhao@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
mm/vmscan.c | 9 ++++-----
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/mm/vmscan.c b/mm/vmscan.c
index a8fd6300fa7e..5b565470286b 100644
--- a/mm/vmscan.c
+++ b/mm/vmscan.c
@@ -5078,7 +5078,7 @@ static bool should_abort_scan(struct lruvec *lruvec, unsigned long seq,
DEFINE_MAX_SEQ(lruvec);
if (!current_is_kswapd()) {
- /* age each memcg once to ensure fairness */
+ /* age each memcg at most once to ensure fairness */
if (max_seq - seq > 1)
return true;
@@ -5103,10 +5103,9 @@ static bool should_abort_scan(struct lruvec *lruvec, unsigned long seq,
/*
* A minimum amount of work was done under global memory pressure. For
- * kswapd, it may be overshooting. For direct reclaim, the target isn't
- * met, and yet the allocation may still succeed, since kswapd may have
- * caught up. In either case, it's better to stop now, and restart if
- * necessary.
+ * kswapd, it may be overshooting. For direct reclaim, the allocation
+ * may succeed if all suitable zones are somewhat safe. In either case,
+ * it's better to stop now, and restart later if necessary.
*/
for (i = 0; i <= sc->reclaim_idx; i++) {
unsigned long wmark;
--
2.37.3.998.g577e59143f-goog
