On (03/26/15 16:39), Minchan Kim wrote:
> Hello Sergey,
>
> Sorry for slow response.
> I am overwhelmed with too much to do. :(
>
Hello,
sure, no problem.
> > > diff -puN mm/zsmalloc.c~zsmalloc-remove-extra-cond_resched-in-__zs_compact mm/zsmalloc.c
> > > --- a/mm/zsmalloc.c~zsmalloc-remove-extra-cond_resched-in-__zs_compact
> > > +++ a/mm/zsmalloc.c
> > > @@ -1717,8 +1717,6 @@ static unsigned long __zs_compact(struct
> > > struct page *dst_page = NULL;
> > > unsigned long nr_total_migrated = 0;
> > >
> > > - cond_resched();
> > > -
> > > spin_lock(&class->lock);
> > > while ((src_page = isolate_source_page(class))) {
>
> If we removed cond_resched out of outer loop(ie, your patch), we lose
> the chance to reschedule if alloc_target_page fails(ie, there is no
> zspage in ZS_ALMOST_FULL and ZS_ALMOST_EMPTY).
in outer loop we have preemption enabled and unlocked class. wouldn't that help?
(hm, UP system?)
> It might be not rare event if we does compation successfully for a
> size_class. However, with next coming higher size_class for __zs_compact,
> we will encounter cond_resched during compaction.
> So, I am happy to ack. :)
>
> Acked-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@xxxxxxxxxx>
thanks!
-ss
--
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>