On Thu, Jan 09, 2014 at 01:10:29PM -0800, Laura Abbott wrote:
> On 1/8/2014 11:04 PM, Joonsoo Kim wrote:
> >Cma pages can be allocated by not only order 0 request but also high order
> >request. So, we should consider to account free cma page in the both
> >places.
> >
> >Signed-off-by: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@xxxxxxx>
> >
> >diff --git a/mm/page_alloc.c b/mm/page_alloc.c
> >index b36aa5a..1489c301 100644
> >--- a/mm/page_alloc.c
> >+++ b/mm/page_alloc.c
> >@@ -1091,6 +1091,12 @@ __rmqueue_fallback(struct zone *zone, int order, int start_migratetype)
> > start_migratetype,
> > migratetype);
> >
> >+ /* CMA pages cannot be stolen */
> >+ if (is_migrate_cma(migratetype)) {
> >+ __mod_zone_page_state(zone,
> >+ NR_FREE_CMA_PAGES, -(1 << order));
> >+ }
> >+
> > /* Remove the page from the freelists */
> > list_del(&page->lru);
> > rmv_page_order(page);
> >@@ -1175,9 +1181,6 @@ static int rmqueue_bulk(struct zone *zone, unsigned int order,
> > }
> > set_freepage_migratetype(page, mt);
> > list = &page->lru;
> >- if (is_migrate_cma(mt))
> >- __mod_zone_page_state(zone, NR_FREE_CMA_PAGES,
> >- -(1 << order));
> > }
> > __mod_zone_page_state(zone, NR_FREE_PAGES, -(i << order));
> > spin_unlock(&zone->lock);
> >
>
> Wouldn't this result in double counting? in the buffered_rmqueue non
> zero ordered request we call __mod_zone_freepage_state which already
> accounts for CMA pages if the migrate type is CMA so it seems like
> we would get hit twice:
>
> buffered_rmqueue
> __rmqueue
> __rmqueue_fallback
> decrement
> __mod_zone_freepage_state
> decrement
>
Hello, Laura.
You are right. I missed it. I will drop this patch.
Thanks.
--
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>