Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 26 Mar 2012 18:10:13 +0300 | Subject | Re: [PATCH] Re: kswapd stuck using 100% CPU | From | Pekka Enberg <> |
| |
Hi Mel,
On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 4:56 PM, Mel Gorman <mel@csn.ul.ie> wrote: >> The API looks fragile and this patch isn't exactly making it any >> better. Why don't we make compaction_suitable() return something other >> than COMPACT_SKIPPED for !CONFIG_COMPACTION case? > > Returning COMPACT_PARTIAL or COMPACT_CONTINUE would confuse the check in > should_continue_reclaim. A fourth return type could be added but an > obvious name does not spring to mind that would end up being similar to > just adding a CONFIG_COMPACTION check.
How about COMPACT_DISABLED?
The current API just doesn't make sense from practical point of view. Anyone calling compaction_suitable() needs to do the COMPAT_BUILD check first which is a non-obvious and error-prone API.
Pekka
| |