Re: [PATCH v2] mm: vmscan: fix the page state calculation in too_many_isolated

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 01/16/2015 06:47 AM, Andrew Morton wrote:

From: Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: mm-vmscan-fix-the-page-state-calculation-in-too_many_isolated-fix

Move the zone_page_state_snapshot() fallback logic into
too_many_isolated(), so shrink_inactive_list() doesn't incorrectly call
congestion_wait().

Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Mel Gorman <mgorman@xxxxxxx>
Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@xxxxxxx>
Cc: Minchan Kim <minchan@xxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Vinayak Menon <vinmenon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---

  mm/vmscan.c |   23 +++++++++++------------
  1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)

diff -puN mm/vmscan.c~mm-vmscan-fix-the-page-state-calculation-in-too_many_isolated-fix mm/vmscan.c
--- a/mm/vmscan.c~mm-vmscan-fix-the-page-state-calculation-in-too_many_isolated-fix
+++ a/mm/vmscan.c
@@ -1402,7 +1402,7 @@ int isolate_lru_page(struct page *page)
  }

  static int __too_many_isolated(struct zone *zone, int file,
-	struct scan_control *sc, int safe)
+			       struct scan_control *sc, int safe)
  {
  	unsigned long inactive, isolated;

@@ -1435,7 +1435,7 @@ static int __too_many_isolated(struct zo
   * unnecessary swapping, thrashing and OOM.
   */
  static int too_many_isolated(struct zone *zone, int file,
-		struct scan_control *sc, int safe)
+			     struct scan_control *sc)
  {
  	if (current_is_kswapd())
  		return 0;
@@ -1443,12 +1443,14 @@ static int too_many_isolated(struct zone
  	if (!global_reclaim(sc))
  		return 0;

-	if (unlikely(__too_many_isolated(zone, file, sc, 0))) {
-		if (safe)
-			return __too_many_isolated(zone, file, sc, safe);
-		else
-			return 1;
-	}
+	/*
+	 * __too_many_isolated(safe=0) is fast but inaccurate, because it
+	 * doesn't account for the vm_stat_diff[] counters.  So if it looks
+	 * like too_many_isolated() is about to return true, fall back to the
+	 * slower, more accurate zone_page_state_snapshot().
+	 */
+	if (unlikely(__too_many_isolated(zone, file, sc, 0)))
+		return __too_many_isolated(zone, file, sc, safe);

Just noticed now that, in the above statement it should be "1", instead of "safe". "safe" is not declared.



--
QUALCOMM INDIA, on behalf of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a
member of the Code Aurora Forum, hosted by The Linux Foundation

--
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>



[Index of Archives]     [Linux ARM Kernel]     [Linux ARM]     [Linux Omap]     [Fedora ARM]     [IETF Annouce]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux]     [Linux OMAP]     [Linux MIPS]     [ECOS]     [Asterisk Internet PBX]     [Linux API]