On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 02:34:05PM +0200, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
> On 08/11/2014 02:12 PM, Mel Gorman wrote:
> >On Fri, Aug 08, 2014 at 05:27:15PM +0200, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
> >>On 07/09/2014 10:13 AM, Mel Gorman wrote:
> >>>--- a/mm/page_alloc.c
> >>>+++ b/mm/page_alloc.c
> >>>@@ -1604,6
On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 02:34:05PM +0200, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
On 08/11/2014 02:12 PM, Mel Gorman wrote:
On Fri, Aug 08, 2014 at 05:27:15PM +0200, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
On 07/09/2014 10:13 AM, Mel Gorman wrote:
--- a/mm/page_alloc.c
+++ b/mm/page_alloc.c
@@ -1604,6 +1604,9 @@ again:
}
On 08/11/2014 02:12 PM, Mel Gorman wrote:
On Fri, Aug 08, 2014 at 05:27:15PM +0200, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
On 07/09/2014 10:13 AM, Mel Gorman wrote:
--- a/mm/page_alloc.c
+++ b/mm/page_alloc.c
@@ -1604,6 +1604,9 @@ again:
}
__mod_zone_page_state(zone, NR_ALLOC_BATCH, -(1 <<
On Fri, Aug 08, 2014 at 05:27:15PM +0200, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
> On 07/09/2014 10:13 AM, Mel Gorman wrote:
> > --- a/mm/page_alloc.c
> > +++ b/mm/page_alloc.c
> > @@ -1604,6 +1604,9 @@ again:
> > }
> >
> > __mod_zone_page_state(zone, NR_ALLOC_BATCH, -(1 << order));
>
> This can
On Fri, Aug 08, 2014 at 05:27:15PM +0200, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
On 07/09/2014 10:13 AM, Mel Gorman wrote:
--- a/mm/page_alloc.c
+++ b/mm/page_alloc.c
@@ -1604,6 +1604,9 @@ again:
}
__mod_zone_page_state(zone, NR_ALLOC_BATCH, -(1 order));
This can underflow zero, right?
On 08/11/2014 02:12 PM, Mel Gorman wrote:
On Fri, Aug 08, 2014 at 05:27:15PM +0200, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
On 07/09/2014 10:13 AM, Mel Gorman wrote:
--- a/mm/page_alloc.c
+++ b/mm/page_alloc.c
@@ -1604,6 +1604,9 @@ again:
}
__mod_zone_page_state(zone, NR_ALLOC_BATCH, -(1
On 07/09/2014 10:13 AM, Mel Gorman wrote:
> --- a/mm/page_alloc.c
> +++ b/mm/page_alloc.c
> @@ -1604,6 +1604,9 @@ again:
> }
>
> __mod_zone_page_state(zone, NR_ALLOC_BATCH, -(1 << order));
This can underflow zero, right?
> + if (zone_page_state(zone, NR_ALLOC_BATCH) == 0 &&
On 07/09/2014 10:13 AM, Mel Gorman wrote:
--- a/mm/page_alloc.c
+++ b/mm/page_alloc.c
@@ -1604,6 +1604,9 @@ again:
}
__mod_zone_page_state(zone, NR_ALLOC_BATCH, -(1 order));
This can underflow zero, right?
+ if (zone_page_state(zone, NR_ALLOC_BATCH) == 0
AFAICS,
On Wed, Jul 09, 2014 at 09:13:08AM +0100, Mel Gorman wrote:
> The fair zone allocation policy round-robins allocations between zones
> within a node to avoid age inversion problems during reclaim. If the
> first allocation fails, the batch counts is reset and a second attempt
> made before
On Wed, Jul 09, 2014 at 09:13:08AM +0100, Mel Gorman wrote:
The fair zone allocation policy round-robins allocations between zones
within a node to avoid age inversion problems during reclaim. If the
first allocation fails, the batch counts is reset and a second attempt
made before entering
The fair zone allocation policy round-robins allocations between zones
within a node to avoid age inversion problems during reclaim. If the
first allocation fails, the batch counts is reset and a second attempt
made before entering the slow path.
One assumption made with this scheme is that
The fair zone allocation policy round-robins allocations between zones
within a node to avoid age inversion problems during reclaim. If the
first allocation fails, the batch counts is reset and a second attempt
made before entering the slow path.
One assumption made with this scheme is that
12 matches
Mail list logo