It took me a while to getting around to reviewing this due to attending
kernel summit. Sorry about that.
On Sat, Aug 25, 2012 at 11:11:10PM +0900, Joonsoo Kim wrote:
> Now, we just do ClearSlabPfmemalloc() for first page of slab
> when we clear SlabPfmemalloc flag. It is a problem because we sometimes
> test flag of page which is not first page of slab in __ac_put_obj().
>
Well spotted.
The impact is marginal as far as pfmemalloc protection is concerned. I do not
believe that any of the slabs that use high-order allocations are used in for
the swap-over-network paths. It would be unfortunate if that ever changed.
> So add code to do ClearSlabPfmemalloc for all pages of slab.
>
I would prefer if the pfmemalloc information was kept on the head page.
Would the following patch also address your concerns?
diff --git a/mm/slab.c b/mm/slab.c
index 811af03..d34a903 100644
--- a/mm/slab.c
+++ b/mm/slab.c
@@ -1000,7 +1000,7 @@ static void *__ac_get_obj(struct kmem_cache *cachep, struct array_cache *ac,
l3 = cachep->nodelists[numa_mem_id()];
if (!list_empty(&l3->slabs_free) && force_refill) {
struct slab *slabp = virt_to_slab(objp);
- ClearPageSlabPfmemalloc(virt_to_page(slabp->s_mem));
+ ClearPageSlabPfmemalloc(virt_to_head_page(slabp->s_mem));
clear_obj_pfmemalloc(&objp);
recheck_pfmemalloc_active(cachep, ac);
return objp;
@@ -1032,7 +1032,7 @@ static void *__ac_put_obj(struct kmem_cache *cachep, struct array_cache *ac,
{
if (unlikely(pfmemalloc_active)) {
/* Some pfmemalloc slabs exist, check if this is one */
- struct page *page = virt_to_page(objp);
+ struct page *page = virt_to_head_page(objp);
if (PageSlabPfmemalloc(page))
set_obj_pfmemalloc(&objp);
}
--
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/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>