lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2011]   [Jan]   [28]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [BUGFIX][PATCH 1/4] memcg: fix limit estimation at reclaim for hugepage
On Fri, 28 Jan 2011 17:04:16 +0900
Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Kame,
>
> On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 1:58 PM, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
> <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> wrote:
> > How about this ?
> > ==
> > From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
> >
> > Current memory cgroup's code tends to assume page_size == PAGE_SIZE
> > and arrangement for THP is not enough yet.
> >
> > This is one of fixes for supporing THP. This adds
> > mem_cgroup_check_margin() and checks whether there are required amount of
> > free resource after memory reclaim. By this, THP page allocation
> > can know whether it really succeeded or not and avoid infinite-loop
> > and hangup.
> >
> > Total fixes for do_charge()/reclaim memory will follow this patch.
>
> If this patch is only related to THP, I think patch order isn't good.
> Before applying [2/4], huge page allocation will retry without
> reclaiming and loop forever by below part.
>
> @@ -1854,9 +1858,6 @@ static int __mem_cgroup_do_charge(struct
> } else
> mem_over_limit = mem_cgroup_from_res_counter(fail_res, res);
>
> - if (csize > PAGE_SIZE) /* change csize and retry */
> - return CHARGE_RETRY;
> -
> if (!(gfp_mask & __GFP_WAIT))
> return CHARGE_WOULDBLOCK;
>
> Am I missing something?
>

You're right. But
- This patch oder doesn't affect bi-sect of the bug. because
2 bugs seems to be the same.
- This patch implements a leaf function for the real fix.

Then, I think patch order is not problem here.

Thank you for pointing out.

Thanks,
-Kame






\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2011-01-28 09:33    [from the cache]
©2003-2014 Jasper Spaans. Advertise on this site