On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 01:40:41PM +0300, Pekka Enberg wrote: > On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 12:32 PM, Mel Gorman <mel@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Sat, Mar 24, 2012 at 10:26:21AM -0400, Rik van Riel wrote: > >> > >> Only test compaction_suitable if the kernel is built with CONFIG_COMPACTION, > >> otherwise the stub compaction_suitable function will always return > >> COMPACT_SKIPPED and send kswapd into an infinite loop. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Rik van Riel <riel@xxxxxxxxxx> > >> Reported-by: Anton Blanchard <anton@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > Acked-by: Mel Gorman <mel@xxxxxxxxx> > > The API looks fragile and this patch isn't exactly making it any > better. Why don't we make compaction_suitable() return something other > than COMPACT_SKIPPED for !CONFIG_COMPACTION case? > Returning COMPACT_PARTIAL or COMPACT_CONTINUE would confuse the check in should_continue_reclaim. A fourth return type could be added but an obvious name does not spring to mind that would end up being similar to just adding a CONFIG_COMPACTION check. -- Mel Gorman SUSE Labs -- 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>