lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2015]   [Mar]   [18]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH V5] Allow compaction of unevictable pages
On 03/16/2015 02:49 PM, Eric B Munson wrote:
> On Mon, 16 Mar 2015, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
>
>> [CC += linux-api@]
>>
>> Since this is a kernel-user-space API change, please CC linux-api@.
>> The kernel source file Documentation/SubmitChecklist notes that all
>> Linux kernel patches that change userspace interfaces should be CCed
>> to linux-api@vger.kernel.org, so that the various parties who are
>> interested in API changes are informed. For further information, see
>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.kernel.org_doc_man-2Dpages_linux-2Dapi-2Dml.html&d=AwIC-g&c=96ZbZZcaMF4w0F4jpN6LZg&r=aUmMDRRT0nx4IfILbQLv8xzE0wB9sQxTHI3QrQ2lkBU&m=GUotTNnv26L0HxtXrBgiHqu6kwW3ufx2_TQpXIA216c&s=IFFYQ7Zr-4SIaF3slOZqiSP_noyva42kCwVRxxDm5wo&e=
>
> Added to the Cc list, thanks.
>
>>
>>
>> On 03/13/2015 09:19 PM, Michal Hocko wrote:
>>> On Fri 13-03-15 15:09:15, Eric B Munson wrote:
>>>> On Fri, 13 Mar 2015, Rik van Riel wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 03/13/2015 01:26 PM, Eric B Munson wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> --- a/mm/compaction.c
>>>>>> +++ b/mm/compaction.c
>>>>>> @@ -1046,6 +1046,8 @@ typedef enum {
>>>>>> ISOLATE_SUCCESS, /* Pages isolated, migrate */
>>>>>> } isolate_migrate_t;
>>>>>>
>>>>>> +int sysctl_compact_unevictable;
>>
>> A comment here would be useful I think, as well as explicit default
>> value. Maybe also __read_mostly although I don't know how much that
>> matters.
>
> I am going to sit on V6 for a couple of days incase anyone from rt wants
> to chime in. But these will be in V6.
>
>>
>> I also wonder if it might be confusing that "compact_memory" is a
>> write-only trigger that doesn't even show under "sysctl -a", while
>> "compact_unevictable" is a read/write setting. But I don't have a
>> better suggestion right now.
>
> Does allow_unevictable_compaction sound better? It feels too much like

For sorting purposes, maybe compact_unevictable_allowed?

> variable naming conventions from other languages which seems to
> encourage verbosity to me, but does indicate a difference from
> compact_memory.

If it sounds too awkward/long and nobody else has better suggestion,
then just keep it as "compact_unevictable".



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2015-03-18 16:01    [W:0.068 / U:0.636 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site